Matt Mello - Origin

ORIGIN

MATT MELLO

The world’s largest digital library

Try Scribd FREE for 30 days to access over 125 million titles without ads or interruptions! Start Free Trial Cancel Anytime.













ORIGIN by

MATT MELLO















TABLE OF CONTENTS

Opening Thoughts…………………… Thoughts……………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………… …………………………4 4

Keywords……………………………………………………… Keywords…………………… …………………………………………………………… ………………………………… ……….6 .6

Jungle Animal……………………… Animal………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………… ……………………………… …......7

Guidelines………………………………………………… Guidelines…………………… ……………………………………………………… …………………………………… …………..11 ..11

Jungle Animal 2.0……………………………… 2.0………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………..13 ……………..13

Star Sign…………………… Sign……………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………… ………………………………… ………16 16

Triangulation 3.0………………………… 3.0……………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………… …………………………20 20

Favorite Things………………… Things…………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………… ……………………….. ..…… ……25 25

Source Code…………………………… Code……………………………………………………… …………………………………………… …………………... ...………… …………30 30

Closing Thoughts…………………………… Thoughts……………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………...… ……………...…36 36















OPENING THOUGHTS When considering the history of anagrams, whether progressive or branching, the underlying methodology has remained relatively unchanged in the magic community at large. Atlas Brookings, Max Maven, and most recently, Phedon Bilek, have made great progress in this area, and I hope to now add a bit more to this ever-growing subject. Not long ago, I released a manuscript titled P.A.T.H.S., P.A.T.H.S., in which I outlined a few concepts to make anagrams even more deceptive, as well as to remove the ‘hit or miss’ approach to approach to letter guessing typically associated with this work. In this project, I intend to further that logic in new and exciting ways. We’ll e’ll now be able to learn what our participants are thinking of without ever having to ask about a specific letter. Even with proper justification, if we ask if the letter (A) appears in their word and we get a ‘yes’ response, it appears to give us an abundant amount of information. With the approaches featured in this manuscript, when we ask a question, it doesn’t doesn’t seem to provide us with as much information as an outright letter would. We are merely asking the spectator if they can focus on certain things in their mind, and we’re we’re then able to read their thoughts, revealing star signs, jungle animals, seemingly ‘random’ thoughts, thoughts, or even personal information like their favorite color or their favorite sport. Most of my work in this area has, so far, concentrated on the area of branching anagrams; although all of the concepts could be applied to a progressive anagram. Branching anagrams are often intimidating when compared to a traditional progressive anagram. It’s the difference between remembering a small grocery list and memorizing a map of the grocery store. In Origin, Origin, we’re almost creating creating a hybrid of the two. Two core procedures will be taught in this book: “ Keywords” Keywords” and “Guidelines” Guidelines”. The mingling of these techniques will allow us to simply go down a list in our mind until we arrive at their chosen thought. There is still a fair amount of memory work, but compared to the sprawling web of lines that create a traditional B.A., origin anagrams should seem much more manageable.















in this project. With it, we’ll be able to learn a spectator’s birth month, as well as a random number that they think of. I suspect this will probably be a hit or miss piece for most most of you, but I personally love performing it. This sort of work certainly won’t be for everyone, but for those who study and apply the tools in this text, you will have access to one of the most deceptive methods of propless thought reading available today. I hope that you enjoy my new thoughts on the subject.

Matt Mello















KEYWORDS This first concept is something that I’m incredibly I’m incredibly proud of. As I mentioned in the introduction, it will allow us to ask questions of our participant without them appearing to giving us very much information should they say ‘yes’ or ‘no’. It’s all a process, and if they say ‘yes’, we simply continue with that process, and if they say ‘no’ we continue. There continue. There is no sticking point, or a ‘failure’, ‘failure’, because they’ve they’ve answered ‘no’. “ Keywords” Keywords”, at its heart, is the idea of finding words within words. For this example, I might ask a person to focus on a jungle animal. I include one stipulation, “Preferably an animal with all different letters in its name…so giraffe or gorilla wouldn’t work , but cougar would.” would.”

To start, once they’ve they’ve chosen an animal, I would say, “I want you to repeat the animal’s name in your mind, over and over…like tiger…tiger…tiger…”

Presuming that this ruse doesn’t garner a reaction from my participant, participant, I’d continue with, with, “Very good. Now, let’s try to break down the word in your mind. I want you to f ocus f ocus on the last two letters of your animal’s animal ’s name. name . Is it possible that these two letters make a small word that you could focus on?”

If the answer is ‘no’, I would then would then ask, “Okay, how about the last three letters? Is it possible that these three letters make a word, or could you mix them into a word in your mind?” mind?”

Let’s assume that they’ve said ‘yes’. In this case I would would say, “Excellent, please concentrate on that smaller word this time, and repeat it in your mind.” Taking a pause, I

continue with, “Okay, I think I have a good idea of which animal you’ve chosen, but I’d like to try one last thing to be sure. Focus on the whole name of the animal again. Is there possibly a two letter word near the beginning that you could focus on?”

If they say ‘no’, ‘no’, we now know that they’re thinking of a (ZEBRA), and and we can reveal it

















Below, Below, you’ll find the short list of jungle animals that that make up this first anagram. By no means would I consider this to be a surefire list, but it is here as a simple example of the “ Keywords” Keywords” technique. When I teach “Guidelines” Guidelines” in the next chapter, I’ll I’ll provide a more detailed list of jungle animals for you to use. There is a method to how we descend down this list, which is relatively easy to grasp with a little practice. The rules are a re simple: The first thing that we focus on in each bracket is always the bold word. Whenever we get get a ‘yes’ confirmation, we remain where we are. are . If we get a ‘no’ answer, then we move down to the next word, or the next bracket. Upon receiving a ‘yes’, we may need to instruct our spectator to focus on a second a second word word in the name. This will be indicated by a circle around the second word. word. On the next page, I’ll detail the full instructions for progressing through the anagram.

JUNGLE ANIMAL “TIGER”

LION

















We begin with our suggestion to think of a jungle animal with all different d ifferent letters, adding, “So elephant or gorilla wouldn’t work, but cougar would. would. Please don’t think of a cougar since I’ve said said it aloud. Just get a jungle animal in your mind, now.”

Give them a moment to think of an animal that fits the criteria, and then we make use of Derren Brown’s “Repeat Ploy” Ploy” saying, “And now just repeat the animal’s name in your mind, over and over, like tiger…tiger…tiger.”

By mentioning (COUGAR) and telling them not to think of it, they will often jump to another jungle cat, and (TIGER) is a very likely option. If we don’t get a hit on (TIGER), we proceed forward as a s if nothing was amiss. I always a lways think that this ruse is worth taking a shot at in the very beginning, as nothing compares compa res to this sort of direct mindreading with no process. If our (TIGER) option doesn’t land, we continue with, “Very good. I’d now like you to break the name down in your mind. I want you to focus only on the last two letters of the animal’s name. Is it possible that these two letters make a small word that you could focus on?”

Should they answer ‘yes’, we can safely assume that they’re thinking of a (LION). To complete the process, we ask that they repeat this smaller word in their mind. There must be a justification for asking them to focus on it. Had they answered ‘no’ to ‘no’ to the last two letters forming a word, we would drop to the next w hat if you focus on the last three letters? Is it possible that these three box and say, “Okay, what letters make a word, or could you mix them into a word?”

















If they say ‘yes’, we stay at the top of this box, this box, which is (MONKEY), and we know that the two letter word is (ON). You can see it circled on the anagram l ist. If they had said ‘no’ to an additional two letter word, then we would move from (MONKEY) down to (ZEBRA), which would be our final option in that box. But, had they said ‘no’ to the last three letters making ma king or mixing into a word, we would descend straight into the final box and reveal that they’re they’re thinking of a (SNAKE). As I’ve mentioned already, this is not a full list of jungle animals, but I can guarantee that if you went out and used this as is, you would likely still get a very high hit rate. rate . I’ll end with some tips that will help you with the memorization and success of this piece. When memorizing the anagrams, I would recommend learning the entire list first and foremost. Just memorize the animals, not the bold words or the circles, or the separate blocks of animals. Go over the list in your mind until un til you can easily recite it. Only then, when you’ve got the list locked in your mind, should you begin to memorize why the list is in that order. Soon enough, it will all click together and you can just focus on the small words to remember everything. For instance, with “Jungle Animal”, Animal”, by the end of my memorization work, I might just focus on the words (ON), (KEY), and (BRA). The full list of words is in my mind, and I know what (ON) correlates to on the list, and so on. For (KEY) and (BRA), I know that the word (ON) at the beginning means (MONKEY). It’s really a very simple process when you’ve worked with the words for a bit.

















Testing this out in the real world, especially with three letter words, I realized that it was a bit difficult for a person to search through the whole word in their mind and find these smaller words scattered throughout. Understanding this issue, I began directing the spectator a bit more by having them focus on the last two letters, or the first three letters, or a two letter word near the beginning, etc. This change has helped to simplify the process immensely, and as long as you give the participant the time that they need, they should have no problems discovering any ‘hidden’ words, words, and we should have no problems discerning their thoughts.

















GUIDELINES When I initially conceived of the process behind “Guidelines” Guidelines”, it was much more elaborate than its current form, and it involved far more questioning. The T he main idea behind this is that we’re we’re instructing a spectator to draw a capital letter in their mind, line by line. Originally, I might have said something like, “Please focus on the last letter of your word, and imagine it as a capital letter. I’m going to have you draw this letter in your

fi rst line in your mind… only the first line.” mind, one line at a time. Please draw the first I would then have asked, “And is there a second line that you could draw?” Were they to have said ‘no’, we would know they were thinking of a letter like (C) or (S) or (O), etc. I would then continue after the second line, and ask, “Is there a third line that you can add?” Once more, if they say ‘no’, this would alert us to two-line letters like (L) or (T) or (V)

etc. If they answered ‘yes’, then I would continue. Knowing that there are no letters in the English alphabet with more than four lines, when we ask, “There isn’t a fourth line, is there?” we have reached the end of our questioning. If they had said ‘no’, I would know that they were thinking of a letter like (A) or (H) or (I) etc. If they had answered ‘yes’, I ‘yes’, I would know that it was (E) or (M) or (W).



















ask a single question, and the process is cleverly designed to end in a place where it seems like we don’t don’t know where they’ve finished. The “Guidelines” Guidelines” procedure is always the last piece of the puzzle. Beginning with “ Keywords” Keywords”, we go as far as we need in the anagram until we get to a possibility of two choices, where we then segue into “Guidelines” Guidelines” on one specific letter position in the words. If you move ahead to “Jungle Animal 2.0” on the next page, you’ll notice that there are little numbers above certain letters. These numbers represent the number of individual lines that make up the letter. A (1) above a letter indicates that th at it is made of only a single line. A (2) above a letter means that the letter contains two lines. A (3) means three lines, etc. It’s pretty self explanatory. But the great thing about the anagrams in this book is that nearly all of the letters are paired to produce a more deceptive process. If we look at the first example in “Jungle Animal 2.0”, 2.0”, we have the letters (O) and (A) in the second to last positions of the names. Instructing a spectator through the guidelines, we would say, “Focus on the second to

















JUNGLE ANIMAL 2.0 “TIGER” 1

LION 3

T O U C A N 1

MONKEY

















As I’m sure you’ve noticed, there are only three new animals on this list: (TOUCAN), (PANTHER), and (FROG). In my experience, they’r e really the only additions that are needed. The same conditions are implemented in this list, that they’re to th ink of an animal with all different letters in its name. Additionally, when I give examples of appropriate choices, I add, “So lizard or cougar would work, but giraffe or gorilla wouldn’t. Please don’t think of one of those, since I’ve named them. Just get ge t a jungle animal in your mind.”

With the inclusion of (LIZARD), it tends to remind them of options like (FROG) or (SNAKE). The inclusion of (GORILLA) will often trigger (MONKEY), as (COUGAR) triggers (TIGER). These little pieces of psychological forcing will only help to increase our odds of them thinking of an animal on our list. Of course, it’s a possibility that they could think of an animal that isn’t on the list. For instance, a person might think of (PYTHON) instead of (SNAKE), but the generality of (LIZARD) tends to force a more general (SNAKE). I’ve only gotten (PYTHON) once, and that was from a man. I highly doubt many women would choose it. Otherwise, there really aren’t that ma ny obvious ny obvious options, if you think about it.

















In the event that they say ‘no’ to the last two letters forming a word, we drop down to the next box and ask, “How about the last three letters? Do these three letters make a word, or could you mix them into a word?”

Should they respond ‘yes’, our ‘yes’, our options are: (MONKEY), (PANTHER), and (ZEBRA). We continue through this bracket by asking them to focus on the beginning of the word, “Is there possibly a two letter word near the beginning of the animal’s name?”

‘Yes’ means ‘Yes’ means that they’re thinking of (ON) in (MONKEY) or (AN) in (PANTHER). To differentiate which animal they’ve chosen, we would use guidelines on the second letter of the name. This is the exact same setup as the box above with (O) and (A). They would draw the first line, and then the second. We would ask about the third line, and this would give us our answer. Fewer than three lines indicates that they’re thinking of (MONKEY) and three lines or more indicates (PANTHER). If they had said there wasn’t a two letter word at the beginning, we would know immediately that they were thinking of (ZEBRA). Had they answered ‘no’ to the last three letters forming a word, we would drop down into

















STAR SIGN “VIRGO” 1

SAGITTARIUS 3

G E M I N I 2

T A U R U S 3

A Q U A R I U S 2



















It seems that star sign divinations are obligatory in nearly every propless mentalism release these days, so I thought thought it would only be fitting to include yet another in this manuscript. I’m not much into the ‘psychic’ performance style style myself, so I typically steer clear of astrological signs in general, but some of you may ma y find this anagram to be more fitting within your work. We start by using the “repeat ploy” on (VIRGO). “Think of your star sign. And just repeat it over and over in your mind…like Virgo…Virgo…Virgo….”

For the sake of teaching, we’ll assume that this misses. Same as the previous origin anagrams, we then ask our participant to focus on the last two letters of the word. The difference here is that we say, “Focus on the last two letters of your star sign. Is it possible that these two letters form a word, or could you mix them into a word?”

















Now, had they initially said ‘no’ to the last two letters forming a word, we would a two letter word anywhere immediately drop down to the second box and ask, “Okay, is there a two in there that you could focus on?”

Similar to the last anagram, I like how this question doesn’t come across as another question, but more of an extension of the first question. I also mentioned that I don’t prefer to have a person person ‘search’ for a word, but when it’s a two letter word, it typically isn’t that difficult, as they just have to focus around the vowels. Should they say ‘yes’ to a two letter word appearing somewhere in their word, our choices are: (CAPRICORN), (CANCER), (SCORPIO), and (PISCES). Our next instruction is for them to focus on the first three letters of their word, “Do these

















On the rare occasion that they’ve said ‘no’ to all of our questions, questions, that only leaves us with (ARIES) in the final box, which we can reveal with no further process.

















TRIANGULATION 3.0 “REPEATED LETTER?” YES

“SEVEN”

YELL

OW

NO

“RED”

O N E 2

















This particular anagram is a bit different from the others, as you can see. If you own my P.A.T.H.S. manuscript, you will be familiar with this new concept in anagrams that that I’ve developed called “Triangulation”. “Triangulation”. If you aren’t familiar, this is simply the idea of mixing multiple categories into a single anagram. This small change can heavily increase the deceptiveness of the piece, as we seemingly give our participant the option to think of ‘anything’. Let’s take a look at the scripting. . I start by saying, “I’m going to have you think of something random. So perhaps you could think of a simple, basic shape…like an oval or a diamond, but not one of those, since I’ve named them. If you don’t want to think of a shape, you could maybe think of your favorite color in the rainbow…or any odd number between one and ten. When I snap my



















But if if the first four letters don’t form a word, then we drop to the second box and ask, “How about the first five letters? Do the first five letters make a word that you could focus on?”

















Supposing that repeating the color (RED) doesn’t pr oduce oduce a reaction, we move down the focus on the first two list to break the word down in their mind. Our first question is, “Please focus on letters of your word. Do these two letters possibly form a word, or could you mix them into

















Should the first four letters not yield us a result, we drop to the third box and ask, “How about the last three letters? Do these three letters make a word that you can focus on?”

‘Yes’ indicates the options (VIOLET) options (VIOLET) and (SQUARE).

















FAVORITE THINGS “REPEATED LETTER?”

















Revealing thoughts that mean something to a person will always elicit a stronger reaction than the revelation of random thoughts. It not only conveys the idea that we’re we’re inside their head, but that we actually know things about them. If we guess a shape or an image that they’ve drawn, it’s











































































































































Matt Mello - Origin

Recommend Documents