RexD
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Equivoque
May 8, 2016 1:37:03 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by RexD on May 8, 2016 1:37:03 GMT -5
I wanted to ask you guys that which version of equivoque do you use? I have my own tweaked version, derived from the works of the greats of our community. Which one do you use?
|
|
|
Post by Ben Blau on May 9, 2016 7:15:42 GMT -5
I don't use the classical approach to equivoque at all, however I do use the related technique of changing the interpretation of a free choice after the fact. Structured properly, alternate "outs" seem like the only logical way you would progress after a choice has been made. I think of this as a sort of physical mode of equivoque (as opposed to verbal).
David Regal has an effect where he has two piles of cards on the table, and one of them is a force pile. He directly asks the participant to hand him EITHER pile. If she hands him the force pile, he uses it to do the next actions in the effect. If she hands him the non-force pile, he takes it and asks her to pick up the other one (the force pile), and uses the one handed to him to demonstrate what he wants her to do with hers. In that case, SHE performs the next actions in the effect, instead of him.
In that circumstance, he says, "Okay, you take that one, and do as I do with yours", as he demonstrates the actions with the non-force pile given to him.
I like this kind of invisible ambiguity.
|
|
RexD
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by RexD on May 9, 2016 7:54:56 GMT -5
I have my own thoughts on equivoque, which I was going to put in a book about mentalism, but I have decided to not release the project. If there are a few people interested, I'll be happy to distribute the document for free, which is my guide to equivoque, in order to contribute back to the community.
|
|
|
Post by rezamikhaeil on May 9, 2016 8:10:58 GMT -5
I would be interested in reading it, as new thoughts often contain gold on old principles but so far I haven't found a version that I genuinely like at all. If I were to use it, it would be just for one choice, not a series of choices.
|
|
RexD
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Equivoque
May 9, 2016 11:30:20 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by RexD on May 9, 2016 11:30:20 GMT -5
PM'd it to you
|
|
|
Equivoque
May 9, 2016 15:45:40 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by chriswible on May 9, 2016 15:45:40 GMT -5
I'm quite interested. As a relative newcomer I've never heard of it...
|
|
|
Post by sipapu23 on May 9, 2016 20:48:48 GMT -5
Hey Rex, I would be very interested in your document. I recently attended a lecture/ workshop by Eugene Burger. The meat of the workshop was Equivoque, in which a great deal was about, what Ben mentioned earlier, "invisible ambiguity". I really like that David Regal method. I think ambiguous language is absolutely fundamental, but having all the back doors is what makes it undetectable.
@chriwible (hey this is Chad from the other sites) Equivoque is a system used to force an object, or several object, while allowing the spectators to make wholly free choices. It is generically called "Magician's Choice"
|
|
|
Post by jeffawesome on May 9, 2016 21:31:54 GMT -5
RexD I would be very interested to see your thoughts on the subject. I love using Equivoque to get to force objects. I've found throughout the past few years that having multiple force objects can make a routine phenomenal. The other thing i've found is kind of a rule for me, but its probably obvious to everyone. You can never use the same actions again in the routine. For example, if handing you something is eliminating it.. you can't later on have them hand you something as a selection. Its also best not to use strictly equivoque alone in a routine, but mixed with real free choices. I have a few other thoughts that are probably mostly derivative of Max Maven, Joshua Quinn, Stephen Long and many many more great thinkers on the subject.
|
|
RexD
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by RexD on May 9, 2016 21:41:48 GMT -5
Sent the manuscript to all. Let me know what you think of it.
|
|
|
Post by sipapu23 on May 9, 2016 23:50:41 GMT -5
Just read through it. Thank you, the manuscript is well put together, easy to read, and covers all the salient point for Equivoque. I really liked the verbal destruction. That is something I have not run across too much, but it really adds a solidity to the choices. Point number 2 is the real jewel here. Great way to build outs and, in fact, enforce clarity while building ambiguity. Brilliant! Thanks again for sharing.
|
|
RexD
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Equivoque
May 10, 2016 0:17:39 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by RexD on May 10, 2016 0:17:39 GMT -5
Thanks a lot, mate. Glad you liked it.
|
|
RexD
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Equivoque
May 10, 2016 10:20:27 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by RexD on May 10, 2016 10:20:27 GMT -5
No one else read it yet?
|
|
|
Equivoque
May 10, 2016 22:08:34 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by chriswible on May 10, 2016 22:08:34 GMT -5
Great stuff for a beginner like me to have dropped in his lap. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by sipapu23 on May 10, 2016 23:33:43 GMT -5
Hey Chris, if you want a good trick to work on your Equivoque might I suggest B'Wave. It's like $10, but it is a good opportunity to work on the ambiguous language and outs. It's Max Maven so you know it's good. It is a variation of Vernon's Brainwave Deck and Nick Trost's 8 Card Brainwave (I usually pair these two nicely)
|
|
RexD
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Equivoque
May 11, 2016 10:31:14 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by RexD on May 11, 2016 10:31:14 GMT -5
I have an effect called Opera. I might give you the details if you want some time later.
|
|