Lost Souls by Fraser Parker

                         Copyright © 2022 by Fraser Parker




                LOST SOULS
              By Fraser Parker


BEFORE PERFORMING ANY OF THE MATERIAL
IN THIS BOOK, MAKE SURE YOU READ
THROUGH THE ENTIRE MANUSCRIPT A FEW
TIMES.



CONTACT MIND READING

The following method from my notebooks is something that
I've had in a very rudimentary form for around five to six
years. I recently decided to go back to it, to see if I could
improve the basic method and make it more practical to
perform. It has its basis in the classic methods which rely on
the ‘ideomotor response’, otherwise known as ‘muscle
reading’ or ‘muscle testing’ when it is applied within the
context of a Mentalism demonstration. This phenomenon
has also been referred to as ‘Hellstronism’ in the past.

Essentially, what the ‘ideomotor response’ consists of, is a
subtle and involuntary muscle movement your participant
gives off as a cue that can be read by the performer, without
the participant ever being aware they have given you any
information. It is a physical micro movement which occurs
within the muscular system of the participant which is
brought about by them focusing mentally in a specific way.
                                1
This response is entirely subconscious and happens out of
the conscious awareness of the participant. They focus on a
specific direction or on sending the performer a specific
instruction mentally and this thought, unbeknownst to
themselves, is transmitted via their nervous system to the
performer, the thought resulting in a subtle muscle
movement which can be read by the performer when they
have proper physical contact with the spectator. It is
perhaps the closest thing we have to actual Mind Reading
because of the fact, we are in reality, actually reading their
thoughts albeit via a physical bridge with the spectator.

Examples of its use date back over a hundred years and
include demonstrations such as, the performer finding an
object hidden in a room, knowing which out of various
items set out on a table the spectator is thinking of, finding
which number or letter the spectator is thinking of out of a
selection written on a chalkboard, as well as other tests.

This phenomenon can also explain how the ‘Ouija’ board
works, as well as the stunt known as ‘table tipping’ from the
Victorian era. Each of the participants lightly touching a
planchette or upturned tumbler unknowingly push it to
specific letters themselves. The combined mental focus of
the group, as well as the feedback created by the
confirmation that the tumbler is moving, seemingly by its
own accord, causes the movement to build and everyone
present to decide on a consensus of letters and numbers,
which eventually spell out information and creates the
illusion they are somehow diving names and other
information from beyond the grave, channelled
from‘Spirits’.

Typically, demonstrations involving the ‘ideomotor
response’ in Mentalism, involve the spectator concentrating
in a very specific way. They will be instructed to focus on the
direction in which an object is hidden or to will the
performer to move towards the correct object or desired
                              2
direction, for example. Each of these tests are spatial in
nature and require an amount of room for them to be
performed in. The spectator would typically hold onto the
wrist of the performer and they would either need to walk
around a predefined space together or the performer would
need to move their hand back and forth over a series of
objects lined up on the table.

I wanted to be able to use this principle to obtain other
information such as letters and numbers, as well as which
category or thought, out of a list, the spectator was focusing
on. In the past, this was done by writing the alphabet out on
a blackboard, for instance, and then moving back and forth
over each of the letters, with the spectator subtly guiding
the performer to the correct letter, in a similar way to how
the object divination worked.

It was this linear type of movement necessary to perform
feats of muscle reading that I wanted to try to eradicate. I
knew that muscle reading was an incredible tool but I
wanted a way to make its use more compact in
performance, so that it could be combined with, and applied
to other principles within the ‘prop-less’ genre, without the
compromise of having to take up so much physical space.
This need for a linear movement which occurred in a larger
space, felt like a draw back to me that I wished to overcome.

I imagined being able to simply hold onto the spectator's
hand for a few seconds, as if needing to make physical
contact with the spectator, temporarily, in order to perhaps
amplify any mental signals I was already receiving from
them, so I was able to instantly know which out of a series
of possible choices they had made.

I particularly like the aesthetic of the ‘Gypsy Mind Reader’
or ‘Psychic Entertainer’, where it appears necessary for the
performer to briefly hold the hand of the spectator or make
some kind of physical contact with them to better connect
                               3
to their thought process. If used sparingly throughout a
performance of otherwise ‘prop-less’ material, I feel it can
add to the overall presentation, when considered from a
purely theatrical point of view.

That is not to say that I only perform ‘prop-less’ material
exclusively. As already mentioned in previous work, I use
‘prop-less’ alongside other more sure fire ‘classic’
methodology within the same set, to ensure a successful
outcome in a more general sense. It is out of the scope of
this book to explain all of my reasons for this approach,
suffice to say any failure that may occur during the
performance can bolster your overall performance and
make what you do appear real to your audiences.

I allow myself to get close or ‘miss’ once in a set. This allows
me to take risks and apply ‘prop-less’ material that would
usually work ninety percent of the time. If I ‘hit’ on an effect
then I can keep on using ‘prop-less’ methods for that
particular group (either interspersed with other prop based
effects or not) and as soon as I ‘miss’ or only get close, it is a
simple matter of ensuring I end my set with something sure
fire.

Naturally, there were challenges I faced along the way, in
order to be able to achieve results that were as close to the
above ideal as possible. If I was to only show you the end
result you may not appreciate why I made the various
compromises and decided on the specific arrangements for
method that I have. For this reason, I will outline the
journey and development of my ideas, so you can better
understand my approach and the reasoning behind it.

I started off with the idea of turning the need for a lateral
separation of specific items the spectator would choose
from, into a rotation of the spectator's hand and wrist. The
performer now holds hands with the spectator and moves
their hand back and forth in a circular motion instead of in
                              4
a linear fashion. This negated the need for the performer to
move the spectator's hand back and forth in a line and
instead, turned this movement into something more
‘localised’ or self contained in space. This gave me the more
compact way to read their subtle muscle movements, I was
looking for.

The fact we are using a rotation means that the necessary
movement happens on and around an axis point. This
means that both the performer and spectator's hands
remain in the same position relative to one another and
only need to take up the general area of space that would be
required, if they were to simply hold hands, with one
another.

My original idea for how to apply this type of movement
was to slowly rotate the spectator's hand back and forth as I
verbalised the numbers from one to nine, in sequence. I
would give the instruction for the spectator to mentally will
me to go back to their thought of number, if I passed by it,
whilst also instructing them not to give anything away with
any physical movements.

I should mention that in order to be successful with this
type of method it is important that the spectator already has
a clear idea of what their thought is before you begin the
effect. For example, when attempting to divine a thought of
number it is important you have already instructed the
spectator to think of a number from one to nine, for
instance. There are exceptions to this rule, which depend on
how the principle is being applied, as will be evident later
on but for this particular use of the method it is important
the spectator has already settled on their choice of number.

 “DON'T give anything away physically BUT if I go
    past your thought of number I want you to,
 constantly will me in your mind, to go back to it”.

                             5
It was easy for me to go backwards and forwards through
the numbers and to slowly hone in on their exact thought of
number, as if cracking a safe. The instruction for them to
mentally will me to go back to their number elicited
a really strong muscle read from the spectator that was as
clear as day for me to pick up on but with the spectator
remaining completely unaware they were actually giving me
any signals.

I simply took note of when I felt resistance for me to
continue with the rotation of their hand from the spectator
and then after moving past their thought of number I would
change the direction of my rotation and start to count back
to what I believed was their number. Again, I would slightly
count past this number and check the read when it occurred
again.

The numbers being in a sequential cycle allowed me to
easily go forwards and backwards through the range of
numbers. If I were to do this with letters of the alphabet
then I would need to learn the alphabet backwards as well
as forwards. However, with numbers it is an easier task to
simply count up or down from whichever number I feel I
am getting the read on.

This allowed me to narrow down on the range of numbers I
was covering throughout the back and forth rotation and to
eventually settle on their exact thought of number.

Although this method worked quite well, I didn't like how
long the process took and the fact I was having to verbalise
such a long list of numbers or items, as well as repeat going
back and forth through the list in order to check my read. It
was an interesting presentation in and of itself, due to the
fact, it looked exactly like what it was I was actually doing;
slowly narrowing down on their thought, as if utilising a
human form ‘safe cracking’.

                              6
However, this was still not inline with the ideal method I
had envisioned. I wanted a way to utilise muscle reading
that wasn't so dependent on the outward appearance of the
demonstration itself, with its use dictating a certain type of
presentation. Instead, I dreamt of a presentation for this
tool that was more general in its appearance and could be
simplified to essentially, just holding hands with the
spectator for a brief moment or as close to this perfect
arrangement as I could get.

As well as this, I also felt that the above application of the
principle was not entirely reliable even though I had already
achieved great success, the first few times I had tried it. I
felt the reason for this potential inaccuracy was because of
its cumbersome nature, brought about by the inherent
necessity of having to narrow down from a larger list,
throughout the procedure.

I knew that the above method worked perfectly when only
using two options. This involved simply moving back and
forth between the polarity of movement and presenting an
option at each of the extremes of this movement. Applying
the principle this way also meant that you could get away
with using only a very subtle amount of movement, which
again was closer to my ideal of simply holding the
spectator's hand.

There would still need to be enough movement back and
forth to get a suitable read from the spectator but this could
be done slowly and in such a way that it becomes almost
imperceptible to onlookers. Not that it would matter if
audience members were made aware of any movement but I
felt like this made the use of the principle more subtle in its
application from a presentational point of view.




                              7
EXPANSION OF POLARITY

I have dealt with polarity before and found ways to expand
on its use to overcome the seeming limitations inherent in
only being able to divine one out of two pieces of
information. Typically, when dealing with binary pieces of
information, I would get a single cue and use this as a base
line to obtain other pieces of binary information.
Due to the fact I wanted this tool to be more universal in its
application, so that it would open up the possibility of
divining a wider range of information, I knew additional
work had to be done. This lead to the various thought
processes and following discoveries.

I thought that if I could break down the overall process into
different instances of this binary use for the principle then I
could include more items the participant could choose from
when deciding on a thought. This lead to the concept of
‘anagramming’ in order to reduce the amount of options
available to the spectator. Instead of having to deal with a
list of eight colours, for example, I could break the process
down into only having to list four letters that were either
contained in their thought of colour or were not.

Utilising this other tool in Mentalism, alongside the binary
muscle read technique, meant that a larger field of
information could be made available to the spectator and
successfully narrowed down based on the way this
information would be encoded by the ‘anagramming’ style
process itself. This means that larger fields of information
can be worked out with much less work.

For example, if we were to consider the R.A.I.S.E anagram
used to divine star signs, right away we only need to deal
with five letters in order to narrow a choice out of twelve
star signs down to just two outs. The use of a star sign
anagram was still not an efficient way to use the binary

                              8
application of muscle reading due to the fact there were still
too many letters to consider.

This would mean applying the principle multiple times in a
row using different letters each time. As well as this, the
anagramming process caused us specific problems in and of
itself and couldn't simply be applied to the muscle read
without additional thought. The reason for this is the
peculiar way in which anagrams work as a method. The
letters have to be considered by the spectator in a specific
order and they would have to focus on the letter that is NOT
contained in their thought of star sign, for example. I
wanted to be able to apply the anagram principle in such a
way that the participant could instead, focus on whichever
letter was in fact, contained in their thought of word. This
lead to a restructuring of what is considered anagramming
and to my discovery of a particular system that fortunately
worked out in my native English language.

My thinking was that if I could know which item out of a
generic list of items the spectator was thinking, I could use
this as a base to guess other information simply by linking
each of these options to others. This would allow me to use
the binary muscle reading in its most reliable and
streamline form, in order to guess practically any
information, without hindering the process of the muscle
reading itself.

I have found that a list of items which can be easily justified
in a theatrical sense, is the use of colours. They are abstract
enough not to appear as belonging to any specific group
other than colours (such as brands of cereal, for example)
and this allows you to more easily link them to other more
specific categories (such as star signs or literally anything
else).

In my mind, it makes sense for a Mystery performer to use
the colour the spectator is mentally visualising, as a way to
                             9
more easily tune into their thoughts, due to the fact, each of
the colours has a certain vibration. We can either express
this overtly in our presentations or hold this notion as part
of our silent script. The different colours hold certain
esoteric meaning inherent within them that can be
espoused upon further in performance. They are intimately
linked to the emotions (of which we tend to intuitively agree
upon depending on which culture we are from). For
instance, we may associate the colour red with love and
passion as well as anger and the colour blue with peace,
calmness and the subconscious. For this reason, these
correlations can be used to justify a link to specific
memories which may elicit such emotions, to be used in a
memory divination, for example (more on this later).

What is particularly useful about using colours as a base for
other thoughts to be linked to, is the fact that in the English
language, it allows for a very simplified anagramming
process, with very little letters needing to be used in order
to narrow down to two possible colours the spectator could
be thinking of. Credit must go to Jose Pragner for first
devising an anagram for colours that results in being down
to two outs from just one ‘no’ response from the spectator.
It also happens to work perfectly for the reverse way of
anagramming I have devised for this particular application,
where the spectator focuses on a letter contained in their
thought of word instead of whichever letter is not contained
in their thought. For me this is a much easier way of
presenting the instruction for the spectator to follow along
with, when used within the context of muscle reading, and
ensures they don't become confused and therefore,
potentially give you a false cue.




                              10
COLOURS CRIB (REVERSE ANAGRAM)

Here is an overview of the correlations between the letters
and colours:


G             U             E             N



G             ORANGE                 GREEN
U             BLUE                   PURPLE

E             RED                    YELLOW
N             PINK                   BROWN


You will notice that I have broken this process into two
instances of a binary choice first dealing with the letters “g”
and “u” and then employing the letters “e” and “n”.

This is a good time to give you the script I use and to
explain fully the mechanics of the binary muscle read, so
that we don't get too ahead of ourselves, methodologically
speaking.

BINARY MUSCLE READING

In order to simplify the process to begin with, imagine we
intend to know which letter out of “g” and “u” the spectator
is focusing on.

We will assume we have already instructed the spectator to
think of a colour. They will typically think of one of the
colours in the above list of outs. These are the most
common colours thought of. We can help ensure they think

                                11
of one of these colours by restricting their choice slightly,
with the following script.

    “Think of a colour BUT make it one of the more
      common colours that others could guess”.

This will stop the spectators thinking of more obscure
colours such as “mauve” (pale purple) or “puce” (dark red),
for example. If you wish you can also state that black and
white are not considered colours in and of themselves, to
ensure the spectator stays away from those options.

We now apply the following script.

“Sometimes I need to make a brief physical connection
 for this to work. Do you mind if we hold hands for a
                     few seconds?”

This begins to set up the premise of needing to hold hands
with the spectator as well as allows you to ask permission to
do so. It also justifies what comes next from a theatrical
point of view and creates the correct context for what
happens presentationally. You also imply that this will only
be a brief interaction physically (lasting a few seconds). This
will make the spectator more inclined to give you their hand
as well as indirectly suggest you will not be gaining all of
your information in this way. It is implied that doing so will
help to facilitate whatever other means of ‘Mind Reading’
you are employing.

Here I hold out my right hand palm up at waist level,
parallel to the ground. The spectator will now place their
hand in yours palm down, where both hands are held in a
loose handshake grip. I then gently rest my index and
second finger from my left hand on the back of their hand,
whilst allowing the rest of my fingers to also gently rest on
their hand (fig 1).

                              12
                          Fig 1.


This placement will become important in terms of method,
in a moment. I now deliver the following instructions to the
participant.

 “DON'T give anything away physically BUT I want
 you to constantly, will me in your mind, to stay on
whichever letter is contained in your thought of colour
… if neither of them are in your colour then just focus
                    on your colour”.

                            13
You will notice an inversion in the instruction to how I was
previously using this principle. I feel this line is easier for
the spectator's to follow within the context of a binary
option and is just as effective at eliciting the ideomotor
response from the spectator. However, you may wish to play
around with using the other line and see which works best
for you. In either case, the cue will feel exactly the same to
you, in terms of its characteristics and strength.

I now slowly rotate their hand to the left about an inch and
say:

                   “So this will be G …”


I slowly rotate their hand back to the right, returning it to
its starting position and give the placement of the second
letter, as I do so.

                  “AND this will be U ...”

This sets up the letter placements (in a spatial sense),
within the mind of the spectator. They will now decide upon
which of these letters are contained in their thought of
colour and therefore, in what position they should be
mentally willing you to stay.

This allocation of the letters as belonging to each extreme of
the oscillation of movement, means that you can now slowly
rotate their hand back and forth a few times, without saying
anything else out loud. It means you are able to silently
check your work and give yourself multiple chances to
ensure you get a clear read before moving on. The
movement is so slight it looks to everyone watching as if you
are simply holding their hand for a few seconds. If you feel
you need to rotate their hand further than an inch then

                              14
don't be worried about doing so, as the outcome of the effect
will still be strong either way.

What you will be looking out for is a resistance from the
spectator and a reluctance for them to allow you to move
away from their thought of letter. This is felt as a clear
physical push back from the spectator, which is applied in
the opposite direction to the direction you will be moving
along, on the rotational axis.

This is the reason we place two of our fingers from our left
hand against the back of the spectator's hand. By using
these fingers to push the spectator's hand back to its
original position, it allows us to easily feel any resistance (in
these fingers) we may get on the way back. Then we check
for any resistance in the opposite direction, felt in our right
hand as we use it to slowly rotate their hand back to the left.

Naturally, the spectator is unaware they are actually
pushing back against any movement. However, you will feel
this very clearly yourself. They won't be able to help give
you this physical cue as long as they are earnestly following
along with your previous instruction for them to mentally
will you to stay on their thought. You will notice I instruct
the spectator to “constantly” will you to stay on their
thought of letter. This is to ensure they will always be
focusing in the correct way, to ensure the ‘ideomotor
response’ occurs and that there are multiple chances for you
to get the read, throughout the demonstration.

To be clear, we are checking for a resistance, as we move
away from their thought of letter. For instance, if I feel a
resistance in my right hand as it rotates their hand to the
left then I know they will be thinking of the letter “U” (in
this example) or whatever letter I place in the starting
position. If however, I feel resistance in my two fingers as I
use them to push their hand back down to the right then I

                               15
know they are thinking of the letter “G” (or whatever letter I
place in the secondary position).

That's it, in terms of getting a reliable read from the
spectator.

MULTIPLE INSTANCE MUSCLE READ

Now you know the basic way to get a read out of a binary
option or two pieces of information, we will continue with
the explanation of the method, in the context of the reverse
colour anagram.

You may have noticed that we added on the line: “... if
neither of them are in your colour THEN just focus on your
colour”, in the previous instructions. This allows us to either
stop with the process if we get a read on one of the letters or
continue on with the process, whenever we get a ‘null’ read
or feel no resistance from the spectator. Utilising this line of
scripting means that in the cases where neither of the letters
called out are contained in the spectator's thought of colour,
they will resort to simply thinking of their colour. This
means they are not mentally willing you stay on either
letter, which in turn, means there will be no discernible cue,
in this circumstance. When we receive no cue from the
spectator, it means we can move along to the next two
letters in our reverse anagram.

Here we give alternate letter placements and get the
spectator to simply repeat the process with the following
script.

 “So just do the exact same thing again BUT this time
           with the letters … E … AND … N”.

Here we rotate their hand to the left as we say the letter “E”
and then say the letter “N” after rotating their hand back to
                              16
the right back to its original position, marking out each of
the letter’s respective placements.

Now we will be in the position where we will definitely get a
read on one of these letters due to the fact, this brings us to
the end of our list of possible colour choices. Therefore, we
don’t have to worry about reiterating the line about the
spectator only focusing on their colour if neither of these
letters are contained in their thought of colour. If you
happen to not get a read here then you can assume the
spectator is thinking of a colour not in your list of possible
outs and resort to using a billet peek or other classical
method to get the information.

The fact that we break the reverse anagram into two distinct
parts means that we will not create any conflict between
certain letters potentially appearing in more than one out.
For example, the letter “E” appears in all of the colour outs
and therefore has to be included in the second instance of
the binary muscle read and has to be compared to the letter
“N” which can only appear in the last two colours in our list
of possible thought of colours.

Each of the letters are dealt with separately within a specific
order, in the correct respective pairs, to ensure the method
works.

In summary, if we get a read on the letter “G” then we know
the spectator is likely thinking of the colours: “Orange” or
“Green”. If we get a read on the letter “U” then they are
likely thinking of the colours: “Blue” or “Purple”. If we get a
read on the letter “E” then they will be thinking of either:
“Red” or “Yellow” and finally, if we get a cue from the
spectator on the letter “N” then we will know they must be
thinking of either: “Pink” or “Brown”.

This works well and is a great way to narrow down on two
possible colours out of the eight most likely chosen colours.
                              17
However, I was still not entirely happy with the fact you had
to sometimes perform two iterations of the binary muscle
read to get it to work. I would much prefer to leave a second
instance of the read in reserve for narrowing down further
on the exact thought of colour out of the two options we will
be left with (more on this in a moment) or to be able to get
down to two colours with just one application of the
process. Again, this feels like it would be closer to the ideal I
had first envisioned of simply holding the hand of the
spectator for a few seconds.

It was this drive towards ultimate simplification and my
desire to constantly refine methodology so that it becomes
as streamline as possible that lead to the following
breakthrough.

If we ignore the colours “Pink” and “Brown” and exclude
them from our list of possible thought of colours then we
can simplify the process even further. Doing so would leave
us with the letters “G”, “U” and “E” and due to the fact, the
letter “E” is contained in each of the different colour outs,
we can dismiss this as a possibility (in terms of it requiring
a positive cue from the spectator). Instead, we can allocate
this letter to a ‘null’ read, which means we never need to
actually verbalise it.

Essentially, this turns our binary muscle read into a tertiary
read or a way to know which choice out of three pieces of
information is relevant, as opposed to just two pieces of
information being in play. This happens without any further
work being necessary due to the fact, we are using the extra
information that is provided to us whenever we get no read
from the spectator. We get this extra information for free
when utilising the binary muscle read, simply because of
how the outs are set up. It is because of this that it feels as if
this is the perfect way to utilise this principle, due to the
way everything works automatically, on its own.

                               18
But how do we make sure we exclude the colours “Pink” and
“Brown” from proceedings? Easy. If you take a look at the
outs that remain, you will notice that the colours left over
consist of the the three primary colours: “Red”, “Blue” and
“Yellow” and the three secondary colours: “Orange”,
“Green” and “Purple”. This means that with the use of
simple scripting applied to when we instruct the spectator
to think of a colour, we can restrict their choices to these
main colours without it ever appearing we are being
restrictive.

MIXING THE COLOURS

The script is as follows.

 “Each of the colours are made up of the three basic
primary colours red, yellow AND blue, so just think of
one of these colours … AND feel free to mix it with any
 of the others to make a new colour OR if you prefer,
      just stick with the colour you are now on”.

This feels like the spectator has a completely free choice as
to which colour to think of. They can either mix two colours
together to make a new colour or stick with the colour they
are on. In reality, they can only think of one of the three
primary or secondary colours. In either case, we have
created a situation where the spectator will be thinking of
one of six options. Even if they realise this is the case, it will
not look like we are trying to restrict their choices but are
instead making their choice as free as possible. Also,
guessing which colour they are thinking of out of six
possibilities is still very impressive and gives us the
extension to multiple outs we require, whilst using what is
basically a binary method.

Now all we need to do is apply the binary muscle read
method to the letters “G” and “U” and take note of whether
                               19
we get a ‘null’ response, in which case we assume the
spectator is thinking of one of the colours relating to the
letter “E” in our crib. This allows us to get down to two
possible outs with one instance of the read.


G             ORANGE                GREEN
U             BLUE                  PURPLE

NULL          RED                   YELLOW


If we feel resistance from the spectator as we rotate their
hand to the left then we know they are focusing on the
position of the letter “U” and are therefore, thinking of
either the colour “Blue” or “Purple”, whereas, if we feel
resistance as we rotate their hand back to the right, we
know they are focusing on the letter “G” and are thinking of
either the colour “Orange” or “Green”. If we feel no
resistance then we can assume they are simply focusing on
their colour and that they must therefore, be thinking of
either the colour “Red” or “Yellow”.

DIFFERENT LANGUAGES

If you want to perform these various methods in different
languages then you can get around needing to use specific
letters by labelling the different positions as well as the null
(non read) as different options or categories. For instance,
some of the time you will not be able to find letters which
work within certain languages. In fact, perhaps using letter
for colours will only work properly in English (as this
seemed to be quite a fortunate arrangement that happened
to work well). This is a simple matter to overcome. Instead
of using a reverse anagramming process, we instead label
each of the possibilities differently (in a more general

                              20
sense), in such a way that we are still able to discern
between the various different outs.

For example, we can label the left position as relating to
‘primary colours’ and the right position as relating to
‘secondary colours’ (in place of the letters ‘G’ and ‘U’). Then
we can verbally throw out two of the outs to create a ‘null’
position or a group of outs that correspond to when we get
no read from the spectator, as follows.

Let’s say they are thinking of one of the six primary or
secondary colours. After I rotate their hand to the left I say
the following words.

 “If you are thinking of a primary colour then will me
                    to stay here …”

Now I rotate their hand back to the right to its original
position and say:

     “… whereas, if you are thinking of one of the
    secondary colours then will me to stay here …”

I then continue on with my script and create a third option,
which will allow me to break down the outs further and
utilise a ‘null’ option (where no read will be obtained from
the spectator).

  “If you happen to be thinking of red or green then
 ignore what I have just said AND just focus on your
                   colour instead”.

This allows us to get our muscle read and non read in the
same manner as before. The only difference is how the outs
are now arranged.



                              21
If you get a read on the option to the left then you know
they are thinking of either the colours: Blue or Yellow and if
you get a read on the right option then you now they are
thinking of the colours: Purple or Orange. If you get no read
from the spectator then you know they are thinking of
either the colour: Red or Green.


LEFT                 BLUE                  YELLOW
RIGHT                PURPLE                ORANGE

NULL                 RED                   GREEN


If you are worried that your spectator will not know the
difference between primary and secondary colours then you
can change how you label these colours based on whether
they mixed two colours together or stayed on their first
thought of colour. This means the same thing but may be
easier for the spectator to process due to the fact, they will
know if they have just mixed two colours together or not
(during the previous colour selection process).

The scripting would now be as follows.

After I rotate their hand to the left I say the following words.

“If you just mixed two colours together then will me to
                     stay here …”

Now I rotate their hand back to the right to its original
position and say:

 “… whereas, if you didn’t mix colours then will me to
                     stay here …”


                              22
I then continue on with my script and create a third option,
which will allow me to break down the outs further and
utilise a ‘null’ option (where no read will be obtained from
the spectator).

  “If you happen to be thinking of red or green then
 ignore what I have just said AND just focus on your
                   colour instead”.

This scripting reverses the order of the outs, so that the crib
will now be as follows:


LEFT                 PURPLE               ORANGE
RIGHT                BLUE                 YELLOW

NULL                 RED                  GREEN


You may prefer this handling over using the labelling of
primary and secondary colours and might even prefer this
over utilising letters to discern between the correct outs.

STREAMLINE MASTER SYSTEM

The following version is what I now consider the ultimate
way to perform this muscle reading cue.

This new arrangement takes into account all of what has
come before and packages it into a streamline version of the
cue. This shift in language ensures you give yourself the best
chance to get the strongest read from the spectator and is
the most effective way to apply the ideomotor response to
ensure it works with almost anyone. Not only is the
language more effective at causing a physical response to
take place in your spectator (whenever this is the
appropriate response), it also works universally in any
                              23
language and thanks to this new arrangement for the
instructions, it is much clearer and easier for the spectator
to follow along. Again, this also helps contribute to an
effective outcome that is more reliable.

It was whilst finishing the write up to this book that I
realised there was a chance you may, some of the time, get a
weaker cue from your spectator which may make you doubt
your read and cause you to assume the wrong set of outs are
in play. Likewise, you may not get any read at all from your
spectator simply because they are focusing purely on their
letter and not on your hand position as you rotate their
hand back and forth. This would mean the ideomotor
response would never come into play, in that particular
situation. In these instances, you would assume wrongly
that they are thinking of one of the null values and this
could lead to you wasting your time, if you were to go down
the route of utilising what you wrongly assume is the
spectator’s thought of colour, in another routine. I am
pleased to say that the following streamlining of the process
helps eradicate this potential problem.

My goal has been to only need to go through the process of
holding the spectator’s hand once, so I knew any calibration
or finding out which spectators this would work best on
before going into the routine, was out of the question. I
didn’t want to have to perform a test with the spectator to
gauge if they would give me a clear read whilst only giving
two options, so that I would be more confident utilising a
potential null third option, for instance. I still wanted to be
able to confidently decide on whether I had no reaction at
all from the spectator, even when I had nothing to compare
it to. This meant I needed a way to ensure as best as
possible that if the spectator were supposed to give me a
physical response that this would happen in a clear way
which would manifest as a strong ideomotor response.


                              24
My solution to this problem is as follows. Again, this is the
way I now perform the cue. First, I get the spectator to think
of a colour using the previous mixing of the primary colours
ploy. This means they will be thinking of one of six basic
colours. I then give the scripting which expresses my need
to sometimes need to make a brief physical connection with
the spectator and ask permission to hold their hand for a
few seconds. As soon as I make connection and hold hands
with the spectator I say the following scripting.

 “If you are thinking of the colours yellow or red then
        disregard what I am about to say …”

This line does the same job as in the original letters version
where we would get the spectator to simply focus on their
colour, if neither of the letters are contained in their
thought of colour. It means that the ideomotor response will
effectively be turned off for the colours belonging to the
‘null’ category. However, I feel this line being said upfront
before any other instructions are given makes the entire
process easier for the spectator to follow along with, overall.
The reason for this is because if they are thinking of either
of these colours they will know to simply ignore the rest of
your instructions. This ensures you will definitely get a ‘null’
read when this is the correct outcome during the muscle
read process.

It is easier for the spectator to follow your instructions if the
process is delineated into two distinct parts where they will
either dismiss the instructions which come next or know
they are to attentively follow along with the process. In the
case where they will follow the rest of your instructions, it
will also be clear to the spectator’s as to which colours are in
play. The fact the instructions are given in this order means
they will be easier for the spectator to process. For instance,
if we were to give instructions and then provide an
additional rule to negate what has come before there is a
chance this could become confusing. Instead, it is much
                                25
better to place the negating rule first, so that if this applies
to the spectator they will know they don’t even have to
listen to the rest of the instructions which follow, whereas, if
they know this rule doesn’t apply, it means they will be
ready and open to receiving the rest of the instructions and
will only have to concern themselves with this part of the
process. There will be no other information conflicting with
these instructions which means they will be clear easily
understood.

 “If I move away from your thought of colour then I
 want you to will me to go back to it, in your mind …”

This scripting presents the instruction in the reverse (as
discussed in the earliest version of this method) which I feel
enables a stronger physical cue to be obtained from the
spectator, as well as ensuring the ideomotor response has a
better chance of being activated (when this should be the
case). This is due to the specific language at play. Instead, of
instructing the spectator to will you to stay on a specific
category or letter, which could lead to false reads to the
ideomotor response not taking place (due to the obscurity of
the language), you are instructing the spectator to will you
to move back to the correct category. These words imply a
sense of direction and help to create the idea in the
spectator’s minds that they are to resist or mentally push
back against the movement of your hand when it is rotating
in the wrong direction away from their thought of category.
This was lacking in the way we previously gave our
instructions (involving the use of a null read) which I feel
lead to potentially less reliable outcomes.

For me, the above scripting is the more reliable way to
ensure we activate the ideomotor response in our spectator,
in order to obtain a strong, reliable and definitive cue. The
fact we will typically get a stronger response from the
spectator (whenever this is the correct outcome) means we
will be more confident in deciding whether to not we have
                             26
received a ‘null’ read when we feel no resistance from the
spectator.

Now all we need to do is rotate the spectator’s hand to left
(the same way as before) and label this side of the rotation,
accordingly.

     “So the colours orange and green are here …”

Moving the spectator’s hand back to the right, we label the
other side as follows.

   “… AND the colours purple and blue are here …”

For each extreme side of the rotation, we place two colours
in a group. This makes it even easier for the spectator’s to
follow along.

Instead of the colours being grouped into certain categories,
such as primary and secondary colours or utilising specific
letters, we directly apply each of the colours to each side of
the polarity of movement. This cuts out the need for any
additional thought processing to take place in the
spectator’s mind and therefore, makes the overall process
much simpler and easier for them to follow. They can apply
your instructions directly to the colours themselves,
meaning the entire process is that much more streamline.
This use of direct labels also solves the problem of being
able to perform in any language. It also means that any
other categories or labels can be applied in a similar way,
meaning you are not limited to the use of colours.

There is also no need to instruct the spectator to
“constantly” will you to something specifics, as there will be
multiple instances of you going in the wrong direction,
during this handling, due to the fact, you will be rotating
back and forth to check your read. This is in built with this
handling. They will be prompted automatically to focus in a
                             27
specific way to ensure the ideomotor response takes place,
whenever you are rotating your hand in a direction opposite
to their thought of colour. Therefore, it is no longer
necessary to instruct the spectator to constantly focus in the
desired manner. The read is obtained in exactly the same
way as with the previous versions of this method. You are
looking out for resistance (felt in their muscles) for you to
move away from the colour grouping containing their
thought of colour.

DEALING WITH THE OUTS

Naturally, we are now down to two possible outs and are
still unsure as to which exact colour the spectator is
focusing on. As mentioned previously, you can now use the
binary muscle read a second time to secretly obtain which
out of the two possible colours the spectator is thinking of.
This would be a simple case of labelling each of the
extremes of the rotation with one of the colour outs and
applying a similar script, to ensure you get a positive read
from one of the options. The modified line is as follows.

  “... Just will me in your mind to stay on whichever
               colour you are thinking of”.

This will work well whenever there is only two options in
play and can be used as more of a universal tool and way to
obtain a binary cue, whenever you need to narrow down on
a two way out, in another routine. In fact, this can be used
to narrow down on any three way out when we know what
each of the possible options left over are, due to the fact, we
can always take into account receiving no read from the
spectator as a third option.

For example, this would be a perfect tool to use when
dealing with the three way outs that often occur as a result
of the various approaches I have taken to solving the prop-
                              28
less star sign divination. If we know the season the
spectator is born in then we will automatically be down to
three possible star signs they could be, for instance. Then
instead of using the various outs I have already taught in
previous work, we could utilise the ideomotor response as
an alternative way of narrowing down. This doesn't mean
we should completely replace one method over the other, as
both are useful and having different ways to do something is
always beneficial. It is yet another option available to us
that allows us to vary our presentations.

What is particularly nice about utilising this principle, is the
fact, everything stays hidden in terms of how the performer
knows the information. Even the spectator themselves are
not aware the performer is secretly receiving cues. As well
as this, the fact the performer obtains the information
covertly means the reveal comes out of the blue at the
climax of the routine, instead of information being
confirmed openly in stages throughout the routine, which
could in some cases, ruin the impact of the final revelation.

This was one of my concerns when thinking about using the
binary muscle read as a way to narrow down on multiple
outs. Due to the fact I would have to present two or three
options out of a larger list of possibilities, it would make it
obvious to everyone watching that I had already somehow
managed to work out which items the spectator might be
focusing on. I felt that this could weaken the final impact of
the reveal, due to the fact, I would essentially be confirming
to everyone that I already know information before the full
revelation.




                              29
UNSURETY ILLUSION

Perhaps, this is not so much of a problem as you will still
appear to know, as you narrow down on possibilities
throughout the routine, even if this appears to break the
routine down into parts. However, for those of you who
wish to create the illusion you have not already narrowed
down on their possible choices then here is a wonderful idea
from my good friend and ‘sound board’ Ross Bartels that
came out from one of our jamming sessions online.

He suggested first getting the read from the two outs you
know they are on (by rotating back and forth a few times)
and then continuing the back and forth rotation of your
hands, naming a few of the other outs. You could even
pause the rotation and hold their hand still whilst looking in
their eyes and slowly naming the rest of the outs. Thus,
seemingly throwing away the method in the process, as you
are no longer relying on the process you was using before.
This is akin to Ross Tayler's “context shift” even though this
is a very subtle form of his principle’s use. It will appear you
are simply relying on pure thought reading at this point or
at the very least have somehow shifted what you are doing
slightly, in terms of what the spectator and audience
imagine is the pseudo process you are using. You will still be
seeming to help the mind reading process along by
obtaining a brief physical contact with your spectator.

The fact, the other options will not have any bearing on the
method working means that you do not have to reiterate
any of your instructions and can instead focus purely on the
presentation. This allows you to be relaxed when it comes to
applying any apparent extended process.

What this achieves is the illusion that you are still unsure as
to which of the complete list of outs your spectator could be
focusing on or have still not narrowed their thought down

                              30
completely out of whichever ones you decide to name out
loud. Even in the worse case, it will seem as if you have
placed the ones you feel more sure of at the beginning of the
process and are simply checking your impressions. This
leaves the revelation open to a seeming larger field of
possibilities and ensures it doesn't appear you already know
too much before you get to the final reveal, which helps
keep the climax from potentially being stunted. Again, these
are just different presentational options available to you, for
your consideration.

Naturally, if you were down to three possible outs (as is the
case with a star sign divination) then you only need to
concern yourself with getting a read on one of the first two
outs you name out loud from whichever season you know
the spectator is born. If you get no read then you can
assume their star sign is whatever the third option would be
from whichever set of outs are in play.

INVERSE OUTS PRINCIPLE

The way I prefer to handle narrowing down on the correct
two way out when dealing with thought of colours, is to
simply guess on one of the colours. This will create one of
two situations. Either I will be exactly right and the
spectator will react with astonishment. This gives me a
wonderful macro effect that will appear impossible to
everyone watching, including the spectator themselves. If
this occurs then I can end my presentation there as if this
was always the intended outcome of the effect. However, if
the spectator doesn't react or responds in the negative to my
guess then I now know for certain which of the two outs
they are focusing on. This allows me to then move into
another effect and link the colour I secretly know they are
focusing on to another piece of information.



                              31
I call this the “Inverse outs” principle and it has its
similarities to my Mentor Kenton's “Outs on purpose”
principle, even though I am using it in a kind of reverse
fashion. The distinction between the two, if any, is very
subtle. He would plan on always performing an effect as an
out if the bolder and more risky upfront effect didn't hit,
whereas, I always plan on using the stronger effect and have
it in reserve for whenever the up front smaller effect doesn't
hit.

This approach for handling a two way out allows for a
strong outcome either way, without the risk of weakening
the initial effect, which may happen when utilising alternate
principles, such as the ‘hanging statement’.

In the cases that I am wrong with my guess, everyone will
have to assume that I still don't know which colour out of
the rest of the outs they are focusing on. This puts me in the
perfect position to then steal this thought, for use later on. I
can either go right into another effect and link their colour
to something else or I can refer back to their thought later
on in a set (after performing something else) and link their
colour to another category or thought.

The way I would handle this, in terms of scripting, is as
follows.

Let's say I throw out the colour “Orange”, for instance.

    “Just answer with a 'yes' or 'no'. This is Orange,
                        right?”

You will notice we preface the question with an instruction
for the spectator to only respond with a “yes” or “no”
response. This is a safety feature used by Peter Turner
whenever he doesn't want the spectator to reveal their
thought, whenever you ‘miss’ on a guess or hanging
statement. The last thing you want is for the spectator to tell
                             32
you their thought after getting it wrong, if you plan on
utilising this information later on. I don't always use this
line as it is not always necessary.

Most of the time the spectator will reply with a simple “no”
to an incorrect guess and you can then quickly interrupt
their thought process and instruct them not to say their
thought out loud. You will usually be able to tell right away
that your guess is wrong based on their lack of reaction,
even if they don't respond right away verbally. This will
allow you to get in your instruction for them not to say their
thought, which means you can usually forego the additional
instruction for them to only respond in a binary fashion.

If they do happen to tell you their thought of colour then it
won't really matter. It just means you won't be able to use
their thought of colour later on. However, I have left this in
for those of you who want to be able to make sure the
spectator doesn't verbalise their thought.

If you are correct with your guess you will get a strong
reaction from the spectator and you can end here as if this
was the intended effect all along.

However, if you get a negative response then you simply
continue with your scripting as follows.

                     Spectator: “No”.

 “Okay, don't tell me. I can normally get colours right
          away. Let's try this differently …”

The spectator may respond that they feel it is their fault you
haven't managed to guess the colour correctly. In these
situations, it is always best to assure the spectator it was
your fault and not theirs. You don't want to make the
spectator feel inadequate in any way and you should never

                             33
blame your spectator for any failure. What is great about
this from a methodological point of view as well as in terms
of presentation, is the fact, everyone will believe you
genuinely don't know the colour the spectator is thinking of.
This becomes extremely deceptive due to the fact, the
spectator and everyone watching think it is their own idea
to assume you have no way of knowing.

This is where you would move into another effect where you
link their thought of colour to another thought. As already
mentioned, you can leave this linking of their thought to
another thought, until later on in a set. The scripting then
would be as follows.

 “Okay, don't tell me. I can normally get colours right
  away. Maybe we will come back to this later on …”

This notion that you may come back to their thought later
on, should be enough for the spectator to remember their
thought of colour. They will know that it is important not to
forget it, as you may be asking them to think of it again, at a
later moment. If you wish then you can add on the
instruction for them not to forget it.

REPEAT IT PLOY

If you want to use the muscle read to reveal a colour as its
own stand alone effect then you can use the following verbal
two way out, to appear to nail their exact thought of colour.

After using the muscle read to obtain the correct letter or
null option, you will of course be down to two possible
colours the spectator could be thinking of.

Now you can utilise what is known as the “repeat it ploy”,
which is often attributed to Jerry Sadowitz but no doubt
pre-dates his use of it. I first learnt about it from one of
                              34
Derren Brown's first books. It involves throwing out one of
the options verbally and either getting a direct hit on the
apparent guess or continuing on with your statement when
you can see you have not hit, as if you were always going to
continue along with your script. This allows you to check
which of the outs is correct, whilst at the same time creating
the illusion that you are always correct. I suppose this is an
early subtle incarnation of mine and Ross Tayler’s “re-
frame” principle.

The script is as follows.

   “Just focus on your colour and keep saying it to
yourself over and over … so this would be … Orange …
                Orange … Orange ...”

If you happen to name the correct item the spectator is
thinking of then you will get a reaction from them at this
point and you can then end the demonstration with an
apparent hit.

However, if they don't react after a slight pause then you
simply carry on with your script as if you were always
intending to do so.

                      “... for example”.

This “re-frames” the meaning of your previous words and
creates the context for the entire statement to be
understood as simply being an example of how you want the
spectator to focus on their thought. You now know they
must be focusing on the opposite out and can reveal this
information however you wish.




                             35
SILENT POETS TWO WAY OUT

Alternatively, you can utilise a written out I created for
billet use.

I feel this is a much more elegant solution to the problem of
being left with two possible outcomes (when wanting to be
seen to always hit dead on), compared to adding any further
process or verbal fishing to proceedings. It is much more
economical in terms of method to appear to write a
definitive prediction in a deceptive manner on the back end
of the routine than it is to clutter the revelation with further
linguistic ploys or other compromises that would be a
detriment to the cleanliness of the overall appearance of the
effect.

Here is an overview of the specific written out I am referring
to, within the context of this particular routine.

Imagine we are down to the two outs of 5 and 7. I would
pick up a billet or blank on both sides business card and
write down the first of the two outs: 5. This is done with the
billet and subsequent writing facing towards myself with
the billet held in a landscape position. This ensures the
writing stays hidden from view from the spectator an