I'm getting tired of newcomers who insist on making silly statements about billet

work being "antiquated" and not as convincing as the new wave of "nothing
written" mentalism. I think the following three excerpts, the first from my "One Man
Billet Routines," the second from Annemann, and the third from a review of my
show at the Magic Castle that appeared in "Inside Magic," pretty well put that silly
notion to rest:

Quote
March 24, 2004
BRAIN WAVES CONTROL VIDEO GAME

DUBLIN - A video game in which the character is controlled directly from a player's brain
without the need for wires has been developed by researchers. The game, Mind Balance,
was demonstrated for the first time using a new wireless headset, at the MIT Media Lab
Europe in Dublin last month.

Research laboratories around the world have been working on technologies which let people
"jack in" to computers directly from their brains, including Cyberkinetics, whose BrainGate
system is currently undergoing trials.

But the Mind Balance game demonstration showed how brain activity could be harnessed
and used without the need for plugs, jacks or wires.

Feb 13, 2006

RFID CHIPS IMPLANTED IN WORKERS

CINCINNATI - Tiny silicon chips were embedded into two workers who volunteered to help
test the tagging technology at [Link], a surveillance equipment company, a
company official said Monday.

The RFID (radio frequency identification chip) implants are believed to be the first use of
the technology in living humans in the United States.

The chips are the size of a grain of rice and were surgically embedded in the workers'
forearms just under the surface of the skin, explained Sean Darks, chief executive of the
company.
"They work like an access card. There's a reader outside the door; you walk up to the
reader, put your arm under it, and it opens the door," Darks said.

The bionic psychokinesis and electronically enhanced telepathy described in the

preceding news reports will soon become commonplace. Already, there are pens
sold in toy stores that let kids draw a calculator and then use it by tapping on the
drawn keys. The answers appear instantly on an LED screen in the pen's barrel.

Also available are hi-tech writing implements that look very much like ordinary
pens, but transmit whatever they're drawing or writing to remote computers or
monitors.

There are many entrepreneurs who've used these and similar technological marvels
to create and market self-working mentalism effects. (The value of these effects is
primarily in the profit derived by selling them to hobbyists. They are, however,
guaranteed to fool anyone who doesn't read, watch television, or occasionally shop
at Wal-Mart.)

AUDIENCES TODAY KNOW ABOUT THESE THINGS AND MAY SUSPECT AN

ILL-INFORMED MENTALIST OF USING THEM EVEN IF HE ISN'T.

At first glance, the problem seems insurmountable. On closer examination,

however, the technological advances that seem to spell doom to psychic
entertainment may actually offer the mentalist the opportunity to be more
convincing than ever.

The answer, as always, lies in the use of the "logical disconnect', the misdirectional
technique that serves, in the minds of the audience, to eliminate from
consideration the actual method used by the performer. In my previous writings I
have gone described the technique in great detail, but it may be summarized as
follows:

The logical disconnect serves to break the chain of logic that would otherwise lead
from an effect to its solution. The actual method employed is thus ruled out. A very
simple example from the world of magic is the use of a hoop use in the levitation
illusion. Without it, the logical solution is that hidden wires are attached to the
floating assistant.

In other words, the presentation eliminates the solution; and this is all that is
necessary, in magic, to allow an audience to voluntarily suspend its disbelief. They
already know they aren't witnessing "real magic". But just as the illusion of a film's
reality would be destroyed by constant reminders that "this is only a movie," the
blatant mention of various magical methods, in order to eliminate their
consideration, would make the magician's task of suspending disbelief much more
difficult. Needlessly passing things around for examination and referring to an
object or prop as "completely ordinary" only serve to remind an audience that they
are watching tricks.

This is not the case in mentalism. There are three types of people in a mentalist's
audience:

1) those who believe that what they are seeing is real

2) those who are willing to be convinced, and
3) those who believe it is all a trick and will not hesitate to explain the mentalist's
methods to anyone who will listen.

To persuade the second group and to effectively silence the third, the mentalist's
use of the logical disconnect must be much more direct than the magician's. The
magical axiom that states a performer should never directly mention a method in
order to prove it is not being used does not apply.

When I first started out in mentalism I used to cringe when famous mind readers
and psychics said things like, " I didn't have anyone write anything down on one of
those special boards that have carbon paper in them or anything like that," or
"These are solid rings of steel, not the trick ones with an opening in them that you
can buy in magic shops," or "This is not a magic trick." It took years for me to
realize that, for them, such an approach was powerfully disarming. By doing so
they effectively separated themselves from run-of-the-mill tricksters and
pre-emptively countered attempted exposures by skeptical detractors.

The same approach provides the solution to the problem posed by modern
technology. It is simply necessary to confront it directly:

Don't use any props that could even remotely be suspected of being hi-tech devices
and go out of your way to prove that you are not using such methods – even if you
are. Better yet, don't use any props at all unless they are either:

1) invisible, or
2) appear to be mere visual aids or "test conditions" devices designed to preclude
trickery and guarantee fairness.

Billets, for example.

Here's what a well know skeptic, who is generally not very kind to mentalists, wrote
many years ago after seeing me perform at the Lincoln Center in Fort Collins,
Colorado:

Quote
. . . I have found most uses of billets that I’ve seen to be painful exercises in self-deception
on the part of the performer, as to what the audience finds convincing or entertaining. But
when I saw Bob Cassidy do his billet routine for an audience of more than a thousand,
those silly bits of paper were reduced to virtual non-enti​
ties. By the time the routine
reached its conclusion he was on stage, standing back-to-back with a spectator, engaged in
what was apparently a full-scale drawing duplication— with no billets or envelopes
anywhere in sight or aware​
ness.

-Jamie Ian Swiss,

Genii, The Conjurors' Magazine, January 2005

__________________________________________________________

Here are some relevant observations Annemann wrote in The Jinx about the famed
billet worker, Bert Reese:

Quote
"As I look through my file of articles, clips and stories about the doings of Bert Reese, I
marvel at the constantly appearing statements that he never touched the written-on paper.
This is a psychological point of performance to all performers who do anything of this
nature. Only a trained observer can give an accurate account of every move, even though
they may not know the method of trickery. What, to the ordinary spectator, may be the
most natural of movements, can be the one detail that would solve the problem in
recounting the experience.

Thus Reese's actions, being psychologically being different in their entirety from the
technique of magic, may seem brazen and bare-faced to a magician not acquainted with
this type of deception..."

_______________________________________________________

And finally, this article by Tim Quinlan which appeared in "Inside Magic" (normally I
don't cut and paste my own reviews- in fact I rarely read them for fear of
discovering that my act actually sucks. But I think the description the author gave
of my 4th Dimensional Telepathy, further supports my belief about the power of
billet work):

Quote
Speaking of which, one of the best things about the Magic Castle is that it constantly
attracts so many non-magicians every night of the week. But the downside of such
popularity is that seats fill quickly. We are accustomed to giving up our seat if a
non-member is waiting. We assume there will be another opportunity to see the performer
during one of our later visits in the week. For the non-magician guest, however, this may
be their first or only visit.

Last week, we started to doubt our chivalrous approach. We missed out on Bob Cassidy
twice – but ultimately saw him on our last try. He was fantastic – as expected. Mr. Cassidy
is truly a master of his craft and we are thankful on behalf of all society that he chose to
use his powers for good and not evil.

As a student of his DVDs, books (both ebooks and old-fashioned paper and ink) and
commercial effects, we are familiar with his methods. And yet, even though he performed
an effect he teaches on Mental Miracles, we were still blown away. That is to say, we knew
what he was going to do, how he was going to do it and what he did but were still amazed.
We didn’t see him do “it” or, for that matter, anything at all.

He is, as they say, really good.

Perhaps he really has special powers and has published the “secrets” to his tricks to distract
from his special abilities?

Is that delusional?

We normally do not go in for conspiracy theories unless they involve movie stars or intricate
secret societies with cool handshakes and funny hats populated by people who may or may
not be in charge of the “real” government.

We also are reluctant to discount any conspiracy theories related to “reality stars” Honey
Boo Boo and the Kardashians – there does not seem to be any other plausible explanation
for their popularity.
We were sitting next to a fellow student of the great Mr. Cassidy and she was just as
amazed. She too had read the books, knew how he was going to do what he was going to
do what he did but didn’t see him do what he needed to do to get it done. She attributed
this to his presentation and did not buy into our theory that he actually could read minds...

[Link]

While technology and purely psychological methods have certainly added a new and
valuable dimension to our art, in the end there is still much to be said in favor of
pure skill coupled with logical disconnects, improvisational ability, and nerve. If
you've got all that, along good performance skills and a likeable stage presence,
you'll go farther than most in this business.

Good thoughts,

Bob