Excerpt from Stephen King's
On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft.
New York: Pocket Books, 2000.
http://www2.southeastern.edu/Academics/Faculty/scraig/king.html
Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
- Zig Zagger
- Posts: 505
- Joined: March 20th, 2008, 6:59 pm
- Favorite Magician: Aldo Colombini
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
Thank you for reminding me of that book!
I recall it as a great read with an insider's--or should I say master's--perspective on his craft. Recommended!
I recall it as a great read with an insider's--or should I say master's--perspective on his craft. Recommended!
Tricks, tips, news, interviews, musings and fun stuff: Have a look at our English-German magic blog! http://www.zzzauber.com
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)
Advancing the art in magic one post at a time (yeah, right!)
-
- Posts: 928
- Joined: May 18th, 2011, 1:55 am
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
Magic of 8
Martin Gardner
1. Write down a number.
2. Write down 8.
3. Multiply the first number by 8.
-------------------------------------------------------
4. Add the three numbers together.
5. Sum the digits until you have a
one digit number.
Explanation
Arthur Benjamin
1. P
2. 8
3. 8P
-------------------------------------
Total=9P+8≡8(mod 9)
Martin Gardner
1. Write down a number.
2. Write down 8.
3. Multiply the first number by 8.
-------------------------------------------------------
4. Add the three numbers together.
5. Sum the digits until you have a
one digit number.
Explanation
Arthur Benjamin
1. P
2. 8
3. 8P
-------------------------------------
Total=9P+8≡8(mod 9)
-
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
- Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
- Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
The "explanation" (equation) part is what confused me. But going through the 5 steps (although not in the precise order in which they are written) and always ending with "8" was fascinating.
For example, a number is chosen, let's say "7."
7 x 8 = 56
56 + 7 = 63
63 + 8 = 71
Adding the digits of 71 together (7 + 1) = 8.
Or let's say the number chosen is "52."
52 x 8 = 416
416 + 52 = 468
468 + 8 = 476
Adding the digits of 476 together (4 + 7 + 6) = 17
What? Not 8? Oh that's right, we must "sum the digits together until we have a one digit number."
So, 1 + 7 = 8.
Another example. Let's say the number chosen is "365."
365 x 8 = 2920
2920 + 365 = 3285
3285 + 8 + 3293.
Adding the digits of 3293 together (3 + 2 + 9 + 3) = 17. We must "sum the digits together until we have a one digit number."
So, 1 + 7 = 8.
One more example. Let's say the number chosen is "4567."
4567 x 8 = 36,357
36,356 + 4567 = 41,103
41,103 + 8 = 41,111
4 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 8.
This works with any number, up to (but not including) Infinity.
So now the question becomes: Does this have practical application in a magic routine (for instance to force the number "8"). Or would that be too obvious because the number "8" is used twice in the process/procedure of arriving at the number 8. Perhaps it might only be good as an interesting phenomenon to demonstrate to people (especially science, technology, engineering and/or math oriented people) about the curious properties of the number 8
For example, a number is chosen, let's say "7."
7 x 8 = 56
56 + 7 = 63
63 + 8 = 71
Adding the digits of 71 together (7 + 1) = 8.
Or let's say the number chosen is "52."
52 x 8 = 416
416 + 52 = 468
468 + 8 = 476
Adding the digits of 476 together (4 + 7 + 6) = 17
What? Not 8? Oh that's right, we must "sum the digits together until we have a one digit number."
So, 1 + 7 = 8.
Another example. Let's say the number chosen is "365."
365 x 8 = 2920
2920 + 365 = 3285
3285 + 8 + 3293.
Adding the digits of 3293 together (3 + 2 + 9 + 3) = 17. We must "sum the digits together until we have a one digit number."
So, 1 + 7 = 8.
One more example. Let's say the number chosen is "4567."
4567 x 8 = 36,357
36,356 + 4567 = 41,103
41,103 + 8 = 41,111
4 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 8.
This works with any number, up to (but not including) Infinity.
So now the question becomes: Does this have practical application in a magic routine (for instance to force the number "8"). Or would that be too obvious because the number "8" is used twice in the process/procedure of arriving at the number 8. Perhaps it might only be good as an interesting phenomenon to demonstrate to people (especially science, technology, engineering and/or math oriented people) about the curious properties of the number 8
-
- Posts: 350
- Joined: July 10th, 2010, 12:34 pm
- Location: Georgia
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
There are far easier ways to force the number 8.
-
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
- Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
- Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
Anthony Vinson wrote:There are far easier ways to force the number 8.
No doubt about that. I like to do it with a cue ball - into the corner or side pocket - particularly when there is a pint at stake...
Interesting that when you turn the number 8 on its side, it becomes the Infinity symbol.
-
- Posts: 928
- Joined: May 18th, 2011, 1:55 am
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
"Casting Out Nines" (in disguise)
with Remainder 8
Martin Gardner Translation
"If all the digits in a given number are added, then the digits in the sum added, and this continued until only a single digit remains, that digit is known as the digital root of the original number."
"A great many number tricks are based on operations that seem to result in a random number, but actually end with a number that has a digital root of 9."
Mathematics, Magic and Mystery 164
with Remainder 8
Martin Gardner Translation
"If all the digits in a given number are added, then the digits in the sum added, and this continued until only a single digit remains, that digit is known as the digital root of the original number."
"A great many number tricks are based on operations that seem to result in a random number, but actually end with a number that has a digital root of 9."
Mathematics, Magic and Mystery 164
-
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
- Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
- Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
In regard to Edward's post regarding the number 9, I'm sure many members here are aware that, whenever any number between 1 and 10 is multiplied by 9, adding the two digits of the resulting number will result in 9. (e.g. 7 x 9 = 63 and 6 + 3 = 9). Again, as many are doubtlessly aware, this principle is the key to the trick, "The Grey Elephant from Denmark," or "The Orange Kangaroo from Denmark" variation. Curious as to who does this trick and whether it generally flies by without suspicion or detection (at least for spectators who are not already aware of it or its workings)? I had good success with the trick years ago when it first hit the scene (it was hard to beat as propless mentalism). But, alas, it may be that the trick is now too widely known among laymen to be feasible (I'll resist getting up on my soapbox again). It might be fun to try to come up with another trick along the same lines that does not use the same numerical principle and ends with 3 different things in lieu of a color, an animal and a country. It is fabulous to be able to do an impromptu trick(s) that require no props or preparation whatsoever.
BTW, as phenomenal a writer as Steven King is, I don't think his writings constitute propless mentalism or telepathy, or mentalism or telepathy at all, any more than it would constitute telepathy for a performer to write down something, have a spectator read it, and then claim the message was transmitted telepathically.
BTW, as phenomenal a writer as Steven King is, I don't think his writings constitute propless mentalism or telepathy, or mentalism or telepathy at all, any more than it would constitute telepathy for a performer to write down something, have a spectator read it, and then claim the message was transmitted telepathically.
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
MagicbyAlfred wrote:BTW, as phenomenal a writer as Steven King is, I don't think his writings constitute propless mentalism or telepathy, or mentalism or telepathy at all, any more than it would constitute telepathy for a performer to write down something, have a spectator read it, and then claim the message was transmitted telepathically.
I think you missed the point of King's thesis.
-
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
- Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
- Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
Re: Stephen King on Propless Mentalism
Mac Stone wrote:MagicbyAlfred wrote:BTW, as phenomenal a writer as Steven King is, I don't think his writings constitute propless mentalism or telepathy, or mentalism or telepathy at all, any more than it would constitute telepathy for a performer to write down something, have a spectator read it, and then claim the message was transmitted telepathically.
I think you missed the point of King's thesis.
Then perhaps you can enlighten me as to what it is...