Patter, script and word choice

[Afields]

well hello everyone! Tis Austin with some things to talk about. And this will probably be a blog topic. Anyway, as the title suggests, this is where you can post your patter/scripts to some of your routines, and people can suggest improvements on the word choice, or how to make it more relevant. My blog post titled "some car theory" can help you bit, but some hands on stuff never hurt

I'll post one when I get onto my computer later. And break it down for you. But feel free to post before that!

[Alex Hess]

I've really been working on this one myself. Trying to come up with a unique quality patter for my routines that are not cheesy.

I have only created 1, and that is for my ACR, but I love it. I will write it out, or do a video of it for you guys in the next couple days.

[Misjief]

Austin-

I love reading your stuff .... and eye burning the red font makes it VERY difficult to do so! LOL! Out of kindness, I just thought you should know.

A really good book on any kind of patter is "Language Pattern Mastery". You can only get it on the internet (legally and otherwise! LOL) It is written for hypnotist and therapist but would be very adaptable to your current cause!

-misj-

[Afields]

Originally Posted by Misjief

Austin-

I love reading your stuff .... and eye burning the red font makes it VERY difficult to do so! LOL! Out of kindness, I just thought you should know.

A really good book on any kind of patter is "Language Pattern Mastery". You can only get it on the internet (legally and otherwise! LOL) It is written for hypnotist and therapist but would be very adaptable to your current cause!

-misj-

Sorry bro, I changed the font, I meant normal red but I was typing on my iPhone and the attempt at clicking colors was hopeless, fixed now though.

I think you're misunderstanding the topic, It's to post your patter for things and trying to see if people can hep you fix it or make it more powerful.

This is my One Coin routine as addressed from me to the spectator

"Much of what I do is labeled as magic -- such as (production of single coin) making something appear. Perhaps making something go from here (french drop, draw right hand away and rub showing vanish) to here (produce coin in left hand). Suppose I made it jump invisibly? (retention vanish, clip in right fingers, toss left hand and snap right hand coin upwards). How about if it defied gravity? (Muscle pass.) Is it really 'magic?' If it really is magic, then does that mean I'm that magician? Or are you? For without you magic does not exist. That would mean that magic is not something that I do, but something you create. That magic is a part of you. And if this (display coin) is magic -- then it belongs to you (place coin apparently in left hand, follow the same procedure as with the invisible jump, except sleeve right hand coin from clip, and hold open to show empty, ask for the hand of the spectator and turn over left hand palm down on top of theirs, show vanish) Thus it is you who has the power to create magic, not I.

I'll also break down why I think this routine is powerful and relevant.

I try and create interest from a philosophical point of view in the introduction, answering the question of "why am I doing magic/why should you care" with the question itself, asking is what I do magic? I then make the coin appear from thin air.
Now the antithesis of that action would be to make it disappear, which I have made my last phase, which creates a line of action throughout the routine.
The line "Much of what I do" also comes full circle in the last part of the routine when I say "magic is not something that I do"
In between the end points of the routine, there needs to be substance, just like any story, so I starting listing some of the points of magic, transposition etc etc.
You'll also notice the routine takes place entirely in my hands, creating a fourth wall which I attempt to break (fourth walls are good for theater, not for close-up) by asking several (whilst rhetorical) questions, but none the less involving the spectator to some degree throughout the beginning and middle of the routine.
I then go about creating a connection in the routine by using the spectator , and coming to the conclusion that they are more involved in what's going on than what they originally assumed, they are not the audience, they are the magician.
Finally I (atleast attempt) to create a strong emotional connection by telling them that the magic exists inside of them, and with the routine coming full circle at this point, I vanish the coin in their hands. Leaving them with the explanation that it became a part of them, whether they believe that or not.

To sum this up, I'm very very happy and proud of this routine, and it shows you guys the direction I'm taking my magic and where all this theory comes from, and hopefully how I see it can be applied. Feel free to use this routine, but I ask you not to post a video with the same patter, as it took me a great deal of time to come up with the idea, and I would hate for it to become generic.

[Misjief]

Austin -

I had a hard time keeping up with you because I am so new to magic... That said though, the book I recommended is EXACTLY what a person like you wants.

REALLY!

As a hypnotist word patterns are my stock and trade!

I am going to take your patter and tweak somethings... ( I will explain why as well) I edited your script so we could focus on the patter. I tried to make it easier to follow but there is a lot going on.

***

Intro

Hypnosis is all about mental shifts - and maneuvering thoughts and EMOTIONS. An advanced way of doing this is, would be to throw this in front of your initial patter ...

"Talking to you as a inquisitor of magic..."

This is an ambiguity as it is unclear if I am talking about her or me... LOL Ambiguities tend to turn off the autopilot and make people really pay attention to what is said as they try to puzzle out the true meaning of what was said.

"Much of what I do is labeled as magic" -> "Much of what WE do as Magi (Humans, people) is labeled as magic."

Builds rapport and immediately starts with your premise that they, the audience is uniquely magical. Also distances you from the spotlight and focuses on audience. The Key here is to simply replace I with WE where possible, doing so immediately shifts the focus from you (I) to them (We). You intuitively did this already going from the initial 'I' to 'YOU', I just smoothed it out and polished it. The traditional technique moves from 'I' to 'WE' to 'YOU' in a series of subtle steps. I simply started with we and went from there.

Series of Sleights...

1) Such as making something appear. (production of single coin)
2) Perhaps Transference, making something go from here*(french drop, draw R hand away & rub showing vanish) to here (produce in L hand).
{ * I'd replace the use of here to here with FROM ME to YOU. }
3) Suppose WE made it jump invisibly? (retention vanish, clip in right fingers, toss left hand and snap right hand coin upwards).
4) How about if OUR COIN defies gravity? (Muscle pass.)

Austin...

At this point I would take all these impressive PHYSICAL Elements and tie them back to her Emotionally. I can tell that was the goal. My way of strengthening this link would be to introduce the idea of perception. And that few things in life have a inherit meaning. We provide that essential link and that is magic.

I am leaving it to you to word it in a manner that fits... as this is your routine, and it is a very fine one too!

Conclusion...The Big Climax

Is it really 'POWERFUL magic?' If it really is magic, then does that mean I'm that magician? Or are you? .... {I like the contrast here!}

For without you magic does not exist. -> For TRUE magic does not exist, [...looooong dramatic pause...] without you to create and enjoy it...

Just like magic the position of power in a sentence is the end effect... In Your sentence the focus was on magic - in mine it was her! Also this creates a shift from the physical & logical left brain to the emotional right brain.

It is difficult to explain but fortunately easy to demonstrate. Examine the two following sentences and notice how you feel....

A) Left brain: " I touched it." (Touch table)
B) Right Brain: " It touched me" (Touch own chest)

Same words ... different order = different result! The key is to always try to end a sentence 'person-ably'. End with focus on people not objects.

Both sentences can be applied two ways, emotionally and physically... But they tend to have a opposing 'defaults'. I hope that made sense!

....That would mean that magic is not something that I do, but something you create. {You got this one!} That magic is a ESSENTIAL part of you. And if this (display coin) is magic -- then it belongs to you (place coin apparently in left hand, follow the same procedure as with the invisible jump, except sleeve right hand coin from clip, and hold open to show empty, ask for the hand of the spectator and turn over left hand palm down on top of theirs, show vanish)...

...Thus it is you who has the power to create magic, not I. -> Thus it not I, who has the power to create PROFOUND magic, But you, The great and powerful Rebeca.

Same principle as before - what and where am I ending on - Where is my focus? Also I would pepper my patter with adjectives and adverbs where ever possible, as it is an easy way to add impact.

***

There is much more in here ... You have loops, levels and lures galore in here! You even talk about them in your descriptions (which is why I recommended the book). I'd love to explore this more with you but I have to run at the moment.

-misj-

[Afields]

Haha sorry mis, I thought you thought this was a place to reccomend books, my mistake.

I really like your corrections,but I feel there are points where I would be out of my character to say. I see where you're going with it, but some words take the routine in a different direction than I intended. Such as Refering to the coin, I stay away from mentioning the coin at all, I leave it faceless because I associate it as being magic later.

I feel like to be too mysterious will create a thicker 4th wall than I would like. This is my closer, and I believe the rapport is built ahead of time.

The great and powerful, aswell as the ad of adjectives and adverbs risk feeling corny, artsy and awkward, these are the only things I will leave out, the rest are definately revisions to my script, I feel you're correct on things I had overlooked!

Thank you bro, more suggestions are much appreciated too!!

[Misjief]

Hay Buddy -

It is definitely your routine... so take it where you want to go.
And as much as I tried not to salt it to my flavor too much, yes, it got in there! LOL

I have no problems with you dropping things here and there. The real point was to get some hypnotic patter principles across to you.

The coin thing was more of a reference to a shared environment, OUR coin as an implied I+U = We thing. I was trying to avoid repeating " Suppose We make it..." and introduce a new trick but repartition is a hypnotic principle too.

You are right in my handling of it I would definitely give it more of a human like personality (yet another principle I favor). I am not sure how my direct mention of it as 'our coin' and your indirect mention of 'it' really differs yet that is what patter is all about personal impressions!

Actually, in hindsight, I think you were trying to be vague - and talk in general to give her more paths to take. As such you should avoid the pronoun 'it' as it is too overused and will activate the autopilot. If you stay with 'something' and the like [The object; A item; Blah blah] as you did in the beginning you will avoid it entirely.

I was impressed with your story handling and felt like you had some idea where you were going with it and never wandered far. I have never heard of the "Walls" you are referring to and wonder if they are what we'd hypnotist would call "Loops". You are going to have to expand on the WALL THEORY for me (I suspect there are others in the dark as well!)

The Adverbs and Adjective I may have went slightly overboard as I tossed anywhere to get the point across. But There is at least Two references I would leave in there (TRUE MAGIC & Essential part of you). I mean a WART can be a part of you... it is just not a necessary or even wanted part. Adverbs and adjectives help further define the focus....

As a hypnotist embedded commands are one of my favorite tricks - and my brand of them are largely as you labeled them... Flowery and flattery. LOL

Lastly are you calling me corny? I definitely play that card a lot myself, as it allows me to get away with stuff no one else would dare pull. That said I can live with that. I definitely put a comedy spin within my own work. But here is the thing I can (and do) hand two people the exact script and their reading of it via body language and emphasis will put a completely different spin on it then the next guy. Your personality almost always comes through!

That is all I got for now...
-misj-

[Afields]

Hey, yeah i'm keeping the ones where I can really see how they improve, i just can't step out of character, and that involves tailoring my language to myself, please don't take it as being unappreciative.

The walls are an actors term, there are three walls that make up a stage, upstage (the furthest from the audience) the left and right stage. These are visible literal walls. The fourth wall however is the wall built where the audience is sitting, when the actor is facing the audience, he is not speaking to them, but the audience feels that there is a four walled room on stage, and doesn't think the actor is speaking to them, but more likely the other people on stage. That is the fourth wall, a glass wall (figurative glass wall) that is just a given in theater.

Not directly talking to your spectators will create a fourth wall, where they feel like they have no input on what your doing, and they are merely watching the magic happen. You should "break" this fourth wall when you can as a general rule, but you can use it to your advantage if you can use it on and off.

[Misjief]

I really like the walls thing....

Nothing like the 'hypnotic loops' - Without getting into much detail you can create levels of expectation with your wording. A fun way to use it is to say there are THREE important points and then only directly give TWO... the audience will generally make up a third one (that suits them and their situation).

I wasn't insulted (much *sniff*) LOL . I just wanted to be sure I got the point across so you didn't throw out the baby with the bathwater!

-misj-

[Brandon Pomeroy]

This is such an informative thread! But I'd like to note somethign on the fourth wall subject:

Originally Posted by Afields

You should "break" this fourth wall when you can as a general rule, but you can use it to your advantage if you can use it on and off.

I'd have to disagree with this in some respects, mostly the first part. If you are doing close-up magic, by all means, break the wall. But if you are on stage, especially if you are telling a story with magic, I think it may be better to have just one or two breakings throughout the routine.

For example, in the "Vanishing Bandanna", you are telling the story of how you got this brand new effect, and are trying it out. For the most part, the audience is just watching, and observing. You directly involve the audience when you ask them to verify that the object is a real "bandanna", but other than that, all focus is on you. By having all the focus on you, the audience is absorbed into the story; breaking the wall would only break the illusion of your performance (But not your effects). You may have meant this by your "use it on and off" mention, but since it was so ambiguous, I thought of my own specific definition (Wow, Misj, you were right!)

While typing this, I thought of what I consider to be a general rule of whether you should break the 4th wall or not; If you are doing magic solely for entertainment, like stage magic, rarely break it. If you are doing magic to tell a message, whatever that message is, never let the wall be built. Of course, these situations can vary, and it's ultimately up to you to decide what's best for your routine.

[Afields]

Originally Posted by Brandon Pomeroy

This is such an informative thread! But I'd like to note somethign on the fourth wall subject:



I'd have to disagree with this in some respects, mostly the first part. If you are doing close-up magic, by all means, break the wall. But if you are on stage, especially if you are telling a story with magic, I think it may be better to have just one or two breakings throughout the routine.

For example, in the "Vanishing Bandanna", you are telling the story of how you got this brand new effect, and are trying it out. For the most part, the audience is just watching, and observing. You directly involve the audience when you ask them to verify that the object is a real "bandanna", but other than that, all focus is on you. By having all the focus on you, the audience is absorbed into the story; breaking the wall would only break the illusion of your performance (But not your effects). You may have meant this by your "use it on and off" mention, but since it was so ambiguous, I thought of my own specific definition (Wow, Misj, you were right!)

While typing this, I thought of what I consider to be a general rule of whether you should break the 4th wall or not; If you are doing magic solely for entertainment, like stage magic, rarely break it. If you are doing magic to tell a message, whatever that message is, never let the wall be built. Of course, these situations can vary, and it's ultimately up to you to decide what's best for your routine.

You'll notice in the first post that I actually mention that it is good for close-up and not so much for stage. I feel that you are allowed in close up magic to build a thin wall for a small part of the routine, keeping the spectators engaged in other ways, just not speaking directly to them or physically contacting them. But close up is about breaking that wall, and I think magic in general differs from other arts as it breaks the fourth wall more often than most other performance arts.

[Misjief]

The walls are a new concept to me, so I am still struggling with it...

But I love it as gave me a way to describe some things we use in hypnosis. I will do my best to describe it. Say you are describing two contrasting items or thoughts. We are going to do love and hate just cause it is easy....

For Love I go to "Stage right", for Hate I go to "stage left" and to be neutral I go "stage middle" (or upstage)? Okay. So I start my spiel in the middle and when I have a positive response I go right and a negative response I go left. At first when I am establishing these, I sell it by going to the right spot and using body language. After a while, much faster then you think, Just like Pavlov's dogs people not only tie the subject to the emotion but link that tie to the physical stage location. At first I go to the location and then prime it by inducing the emotion, once that is done I can simply go to the location. the more this is repeated the stronger the linkage.

The biggest use for this is if you ever flub it .... Move for both your sake and the audience's. Make a joke of it ... but move and start anew. It works! Negative elements form anchors very fast, especially in us the performers, so move so that you can drop it and go on without the mental baggage..

You can do this for a lot of things... The only thing is that your anchors have to be very clean. A move of six inches one way or another is probably not going to be distinct enough for your audience to pick up on their cues, it needs to be more clear then that. The more clear and distinct the better.

Pick a spot on stage. Then do a trick and go to the spot or do the physical move {analog marking!} to prompt your audience for applause. You probably will only have to prompt them 2 or 3 times - after wards you can simply trigger it with the anchor. Not only that but you can build on them as well...
Say you get someone laughing - Anchor it - then later you can fire it and drop a fresh punchline. It will be as if the emotion stacked built upon the first incident rather then start anew.

***
Anyways we got on a serious tangent there... I have been toying with it and I think the rule is that the smaller the audience and the less formal the event the more you can break the 4th wall, where as the larger the audience and the more formal the event the less so. Heck, I don't know! LOL

-misj-

[Brandon Pomeroy]

Originally Posted by Afields

You'll notice in the first post that I actually mention that it is good for close-up and not so much for stage.

*Facepalm* Pardon me, then. I suppose by the time I had read all the way to the bottom of the page, I had forgotten what the top said! Foot in mouth moment for sure.

And misj, I'm not sure I understand your movement theory. Actually, I understand the conditioning part well enough, but about the physical movement. Are you saying that whenever people laugh or applaud you move to the right of the stage? What sort of situation would bring about hate and move you to the left?

[Afields]

Originally Posted by Brandon Pomeroy

*Facepalm* Pardon me, then. I suppose by the time I had read all the way to the bottom of the page, I had forgotten what the top said! Foot in mouth moment for sure.

And misj, I'm not sure I understand your movement theory. Actually, I understand the conditioning part well enough, but about the physical movement. Are you saying that whenever people laugh or applaud you move to the right of the stage? What sort of situation would bring about hate and move you to the left?

I don't think he's talking about purely negative things, but using the anchor system for things like applause cues, dramatic moments and tangent moments, using the stage to condition people to be quiet, get loud and laugh.

Which is a very very interesting theory i'd love to explore

[Misjief]

I used the example I did just because it was so polarized it the contrast could easily be seen... Not really meaning for it to directly apply to magic. I was just a way to demonstrate the principle. Nothing more.

Politicians and especially lawyers do it all the time....

Talk about something negative and tie it to a space ... Then return to the space and talk about your opponent and his cause. LOL. In this case (politics!) it is negative... but it can almost as easily be applied to more positive uses. Oddly humans are for the most part negative oriented so it is always easier to do with negatives but not necessary and certainly not as rewarding.

Anchors are VERY EASY to do and for the most part we are rarely aware of them. Think about this ...
A guy buys his wife flowers every time something bad happens or he screws up. Then one day he buys flowers for the hell of it... and his wife is suddenly as fun to be around as a goat eating dynamite. Neither party knows what happened just out of the blue there was a big unexplained explosion. It happens all the time.

Another example is that a guy (could be a lady) works their butt off to get to the top and see success. Their mate is right behind them pushing and the minute they make it to the top what do they do? Divorce their mate! Why? Because they associate them with the hard times they are trying to leave behind.

Humans are pattern driven - we will find and associate patterns in everything we do. It is our nature!

Here is a easy kinetic one....
Watch a movie or TV show ... Any show you like...
When they want things to come off casual they will move left to right (as we read)... But a car chase or fight always moves right to left. (Awkward!) Try it! It works LOL The secondary moves are away from audience is calm - Towards audience is adrenaline mode.

I didn't believe it and started watching for it. It pretty much holds true. The news reporters are suppose to do a bunch of analog marking and anchors but since I don't have a tv I haven't really researched that one.

But as Austin said it would be much much easier to use it for applause cues and the like. Also anchoring your audience to build suspense and the like. Most magi do a trick collect their reward (applause) and then start all over in a cycle. Rather then do that I suggest you learn anchoring and build continually build one event upon another. The audience has no idea what is going on in their heads they just know that they enjoy your shows that much more. Really cool stuff!

-misj-