For those who would like to try a “real” parapsychological presentation, here are definitions of the principal terms used in ESP research, with in each case suggestions for standard or published techniques and effects which could be used as illustrations. All definitions are by Dr J B Rhine, the pioneer of modern research. The title of this piece, by the way, is a tribute to (i.e. lovingly borrowed from) Arthur Koestler’s great book The Roots of Coincidence.
ESP (Extrasensory perception)
ESP is defined as “Experience of, or response to, a target object, state, event or influence without sensory contact”. The main types of ESP are telepathy, clairvoyance and precognition.
Telepathy
Telepathy is defined as “extrasensory perception of the mental state or activity of another person”. In practical terms, it is direct mind-to-mind communication, and for a pure telepathy experiment (as opposed to GESP, below) all other forms of ESP, particularly clairvoyance, must be eliminated. The target information must exist only in the mind of the sender, or “agent”, and not on any kind of object, such as a piece of paper or playing card. There are a number of ways in which this can be achieved. Firstly, the thought can be written down, memorised and destroyed in order to ensure that no impression can be picked up from the writing by clairvoyance. This of course is excellent justification for the classic centre tear.
Another way to achieve pure telepathy is for the spectator simply to think of the target object, without touching it or writing anything down. Judgement Day in Luke Jermay’s Building Blocks or Richard Busch’s 21st Century Imagery in Peek Performances would be examples.
A further possibility is through the use of a thumb writer. A simple presentation may involve asking the spectator to think of an ESP symbol, then “drawing” it on a business card, or showing that it has been ticked off against a list of symbols.
Perhaps the closest a mentalist can come to real telepathy is cold reading; the second closest is contact mind-reading, sometimes known as muscle reading or Hellstromism.
Clairvoyance
Clairvoyance is defined as “extrasensory perception of objects or objective events”. In contrast to telepathy, here the target must exist only as an object, not in the mind of the spectator or anyone else, and the image is picked up directly from the object. Essentially, therefore, the performer is required to detect an object that neither his volunteer spectator nor the audience has seen.
One could simply false shuffle a pack of cards, retaining the top card, and then “read” it unseen, but this would not be impressive. My first experiment along these lines was to use a card box; a similar effect using a single card can be obtained with an envelope switch or a Himber wallet.
Another clairvoyance demonstration of my own is a presentation for Original Kolossal Killer, written up in Kenton Knepper’s follow-up book, Killer Konceptions. The performer shows his wallet, into which he has placed an unseen playing card. The spectator detects the card by clairvoyance.
GESP
GESP (General Extrasensory Perception) is defined as “ESP which could be either telepathy or clairvoyance or both.” The agent continues to look at the target object while sending its image to the “percipient” (receiver); the percipient can therefore receive the image either by telepathy from the agent’s mind, by clairvoyance from the object itself, or by a combination of both.
Most mentalism (and mental magic) effects fall within this category – “pick a card; look at it; you’re thinking of the two of clubs”). Broadly speaking, there are two ways to achieve this kind of effect – forcing a choice on the spectator or secretly discovering what he has chosen. Most book tests are GESP experiments.
Precognition
Precognition is defined as “prediction of random future events the occurrence of which cannot be inferred from present knowledge.” This is therefore the technical term covering all types of prediction, extremely popular among mentalists. There are two cautions regarding the use of predictions.
Firstly, as T A Waters points out in Mind, Myth and Magick, predictions are intrinsically less believable than the other forms of ESP which have been previously discussed; it is not easy to maintain even a temporary suspension of disbelief. Waters suggests that the “spectator as mind reader” or “mind control” presentations of the prediction type of effect are easier to put over – with a preference for the former.
The second caution relates to the consequences of being able to make predictions. If a performer makes a headline prediction and the day’s headline concerns a plane crash or a terrorist outrage – could he have prevented it? Or did he cause it? If he correctly predicts winning lottery numbers – why isn’t he a multi-millionaire?
My own general solution to these problems is that precognition is a far more difficult faculty to demonstrate than GESP because it involves moving outside normal space-time. Tests must be much more restricted. This argument is particularly useful in performing “Mental Epic” effects such as Mark Wilson’s Three-Way Test. This is a one-ahead routine testing clairvoyance, telepathy and precognition, with the final precognition phase depending on a force of one of only three drawings. (In fact, when performing it I usually substitute a card force.)
Any force can be used as a prediction effect; this would include many book tests. A thumb writer can also be used in many different ways; Corinda’s Step One is wholly devoted to effects with the “Swami Gimmick”, mostly predictions.
While with Corinda, the whole of Step Four is devoted to “Predictions”. Before giving specific effects for both stage and “drawing room”, Corinda discusses technique, with three main aspects – secretly loading a sealed envelope using a billet knife or his own “Billet Pencil”, switches, and the use of the pocket index, another major tool for predictions. Corinda regards predictions as particularly strong effects, basically for the same reasons that Waters regards them as too strong – so care needs to be taken to present them in a context which will work credibly with your own style.