Derren Brown: Archive
| Message ID: 02111 | [ Previous ] [ Next ] [ Up Thread ] |
From: killerb_0187
Date: Tue Dec 31, 2002 5:43pm
Subject: Re: Stooges, Actors and Tricks - The Exposé
> I am amused by your comparison to Uri Geller, I'd lloovvee to hear
> DBs
> reply to that!!
>
I posted this quite long ago in post #1099, it's derren posting on a
magic forum, when he wasn't famous!! (he replies to Uri-gellers
claims to be a psychic!!)
This is the first time I'm posting the full thing however... It's
quite lengthy, but you can skip it all to get to derren!! :)
Link is here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-
8&threadm=20011127001124.10820.00003059%40mb-
mq.aol.com&rnum=4&prev=/groups%3Fnum%3D100%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%
3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26as_qdr%3Dall%26q%3Dsubliminal%2Bderren%2Bbrown%
26sa%3DN%26tab%3Dwg
(people had problems accessing it, this is why I'm posting the whole
thing!)
----------------------------------------------------------------
I will be posting every message from theEYE. This way they become a
valuable
resource available to everyone just by searching Google Groups from
here on
out. Join theEYE by e-mailing
226 From: Steve Posch
Date: Thu Jul 29, 1999 8:31pm
Subject: Four Coin Mentalism
I loved the four coin force when I first read it in Banachek's book
a couple
of months ago. This is the presentation I came up with. I haven't
tried it yet,
so do it at your own risk! If you try it, let me know how it works
out.
As seen by the spectator: The performer pulls out some change from
his pocket
with his left hand, then with the right hand he picks out a nickel,
dime,
penny, and quarter and sets them on the table. Spectator is asked to
pick one
(let's say they pick the dime for this example.) The performer
says "I had a
feeling you'd pick that one. In fact, I was SO sure, that I kept this
aside as
a prediction." The performer pulls a dime out of his left hand and
holds it up
to show that they match. (The left hand remains loosely closed after
the 4
coins are initially taken out of it - they should not be allowed to
see what's
in it)
Act like the effect is over. At this point they will probably believe
they have
caught you - they'll think you simply kept a duplicate of each of the
coins in
your left hand, and pulled the matching one out after you saw which
one they
took. If they don't catch on, you may need to lead them - just say "I
did this
for someone yesterday, and do you know what they thought..."
Now, shake your left hand (still loosely closed from the beginning of
the
trick), and the spectator hears all the coins jingling. At this point
they
should be absolutely convinced they know the "secret". Say "Well, I
suppose I
COULD have done it that way. But I'd rather just trust my instincts."
Now, open
your left hand and show it contains ALL DIMES.
Alternate ending (moving away from mentalism): Since they believe
your hand has
one of each kind of coin, you are in a great position to magically
change them
all to dimes.
The method should be clear if you're familiar with the four coin
psychological
force from "Psychological Subtleties". Set up your pocket so it
contains a
bunch of dimes, and only a single penny, nickel, and quarter. Pull
them all out
in your left hand, keeping it covered somewhat so they can't see
exactly what's
in it. Once you pull the four coins out and set them on the table,
only dimes
will be remaining in your left hand. (Assuming, of course, you're
forcing the
dime.)
Certain spectators may be prone to pick the quarter (I think someone
already
reported this here). I suspect this would be especially true of kids,
since a
quarter may seem like a lot of money. Likewise for any spectator who
is overly
helpful and thinks you want them to pick the quarter. SO, if you're
performing
for someone who you think is likely to pick the quarter, why not put
the
quarter into the force position ahead of time for them to increase
the odds.
Just continue with the quarter as the forced coin.
Another random thought. If you want to perform this walk-around with
no table
space, you could glue the coins to a strip of cardboard. Or glue them
to the
back of your pad or clipboard if you are carrying one of these for
your
performance anyway. They can just make the selection verbally.
Steve P
227 From: Rick Jordan
Date: Thu Jul 29, 1999 10:00pm
Subject: Re: Re: Magic & Mentalism
A few points here, no disrespect intended. . .
wrote:
> Of course, viewing things from the other side of the coin, if you
are a
> magician doing mentalism as part of your magic show, that material
will be
> viewed as a trick, pure and simple.
How else would we have people view mentalism? It is a trick, and to
ascribe it
to "psychic
powers" is misleading at best.
> Sure there may be a few who will be caught up and see your stuff
as 'powers' (or however
> you wish to be perceived) . . .
I think it would be best to disavow these people of any notion that
you
actually have
'powers' and simply present your tricks as what they are: excellent
entertainment.
I think it is wrong to present oneself as a genuine psychic. What got
me into
mentalism in the first place was the opportunity to debunk people
like Uri
Geller, Sylvia
Browne, et. al. who profit off of people's credulity.
As to the larger topic at hand, I think mentalism and magic can
coexist if the
right tricks
are presented. I've found that the ITR tricks, card tricks such as the
Invisible Deck and
New Wave Prediction, coin tricks such as Scotch and Soda, and props
like the
Bat are
excellent accompaniments to mentalism routines. The keys for me are
1)awe-inspiring,
logic-defying effects, 2)The barest minimum of props, and 3)Clean
presentation.
Just my opinion,
Rick Jordan
228 From: Brandon Thomas
Date: Thu Jul 29, 1999 11:11pm
Subject: Re: Re: Magic & Mentalism
You are right...just your opinion. I do not give a disclaimer when
presenting
any effects. I let the audience make their decisions. After
all...most films do
not start..."hello...I am an actor." I do not start my show saying
that I am a
magician...nor do I claim that I am psychic...but then I do not say
that I am.
You do not believe in the paranormal? ;) Such a pity.
Regards,
Brandon Thomas
Psychic Entertainment
229 From:
Date: Thu Jul 29, 1999 10:26pm
Subject: Re: Four Coin Mentalism
>>Dennis has a great idea utilizing the psychological force
mentioned in the
Banachek book.<<
Thanks for the compliment, Bill. Sometimes a decent idea will pop
into that
noggin of mine.
>>Have you ever noticed that psychological forces rarely work on
magicians? It may be because they purposely try to "mess you up" or
that
they genuinely want to "help you out". In either case, they usually
do "mess
you up."
Good point. I'm pretty sure that if this effect were to be pulled on
me,
that I would probably put the penny under the cup. Why? I guess
because
it's the most different. Copper instead of silver. It would be
interesting
to do a little "study" and try this on, say, 50 to 100 magicians to
find out
which coin would be chosen most often to go under the cup. I really
have no
idea. But I have a feeling that the nickel would be the coin least
chosen,
among both magicians and laypersons.
>>This idea brings up an important point. What are your feelings on
using
confederates? Pro or con?<<
Great idea about the use of a confederate in this effect.
Confederates in
general? I have no problem with them. However, I don't think that a
mentalist should rely upon them for the majority of his effects. Part
of the
challenge and fun of mentalism, in my opinion, is the utilization of
the vast
array of subtle psychological principles and other clever methods
which can
be utilized in many effects.
Dennis
230 From: Derren Brown
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 10:48am
Subject: New member says hello. "Hello"
short biog -
Derren Brown
English, born Feb 1971. I am a full time close-up magician/pickpocket
and
hypnotist, with the regulation goatee. My particular interest is in
combining
hypnosis with close-up mindreading/strong magic to form something
new. I humbly
mention that there are some videos of me doing this available from
International Magic in London and there'll be a new lecture video and
a book
out in the New Year. I am both attracted to and repelled by what gets
called
'mentalism': it is potentially so powerful but in practice often less
than
entertaining. I'm interested to communicate with anyone who has a
passion for
exploring the boundaries of the art, and thinking freely and
independently
about performance.
Big hugs to you all.
231 From:
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 2:32am
Subject: Re: Re: Magic & Mentalism
In a message dated 7/30/99 5:04:17 AM !!!First Boot!!!,
writes:
<< It is a trick, and to ascribe it to "psychic
powers" is misleading at best. >>
I respect your position on this but I disagree with you. I believe
mentalism
should be presented as stricly mentalism, not tricks. Mentalism is
the only
type of magic that doesnt rely on props or visual illusions. The
methods are
almost always simple. Take banachek's psychokinetic time for example,
how
would people react to it if you presented that as a trick? Like I
said
before, I let the audience decide for themselves but I believe
mentalism
should never be presented as tricks. You mentioned "entertainment".
Pure
mentalism IS entertaining. Trying to figure out how the magician did
his
"tricks" is not. I once did some mentalism plus a couple of
telekinetic
effects (with IT) to an old sickly man. The old man loved it and
accepted it
as being real. You should have seen how my so called "tricks" changed
this
man's life. He is still alive and incredibly well. Prior to that, he
spent
his days just laying in bed waiting to die. Everytime I see him, he
thanks
me for giving him hope. Can you believe that? Something as simple as
guessing his card or floating a dollar bill could actually have an
impact on
someone's life. Isn't that what mentalism(or magic for that matter)
is all
about?
232 From:
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 3:32am
Subject: Re: Re: Magic, Mentalism & Psychic ....... Definitions
Really have enjoyed everyones post on this topic. For me it comes
done to
vocabulary and definitions. To me "personally" a mentalist is a
performer who
does mental magic. A magician is someone who does all types of magic
and can
blend magic effects with a mental magic portion of the show. The
strongest
mentalist performerances I have seen were straight mentalism and not
mixed
with magic. Then there is psychic entertainment which is
demonstrating mental
powers, comforting, educating and even consulting audience members.
It is
strange but if you walk up to the average person on the street and
ask them
what a mentalist is they won't be able to tell you. But they will
know what a
psychic is at some level. I've even seen computer spell checkers
which have
no idea of what a mentalist or mentalism is. I remember seeing
Kreskin many
years ago and you were left with a deep feeling of respect for him
and the
unseen powers and potentials of ESP as well as totally entertained.
The last
few times I have seen him on Letterman it was nothing but humilation
and a
joke. I was really grieved by the disrespect shownto him. I believe
alot of
this has to do with the publics seperation of mental magic from
psychic
power. Mixing magic and mental magic is one thing. Mixing magic and
psyhic
entertainment is another situation. I would like to know how others
think
about and define these terms..... Magician, Mentalist, Psychic
Entertainer.
Best
David Arcadian
233 From:
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 4:03am
Subject: Re: Re: Magic, Mentalism & Psychic ....... Follow Up
You know I remember talking to people 10 years ago who would ask if
Copperfields powers were real ? Funny now to even consider the
question in a
serious way. Also when the early buzz saw effects were performed
people
FREAKED because they thot it was real. Relating this to mentalism,
the
audiences we stand before "today" are a wild mix of been there done
that,
show me something new and strangely nave to some of the most well
known and
simple effects of the mentalist/psychics history. These audiences
need us to
provide a bit more "creative intensity" but can be entertained with
many of
the very simple "techniques" from the past.
Best
David Arcadian
234 From: Eric Chartiot
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 5:05pm
Subject: Hello
Hello everybody
My name is Eric. You may forgive my english as it is not my mother
tong.
I am an amateur magician and am specially interested in mentalism and
psychics effects. I guess that these can really give people what E.
Burger would probably call "the experience of magic".
I think the psychological dimension in magic is also a very
interesting
theme and I am also a student of cold reading.
I have been looking for Phil Goldstein's books for a long time but
until
now haven't been able to find anything but the "fifth" which is very
interesting.
Can anybody help me finding the other four ?
Thanks in advance
Eric
235 From: Ray Haddad
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 5:17pm
Subject: Re: Re: Magic & Mentalism
Mark and others,
While I agree with the general concept of not mixing traditional
magic and mentalism in a show, I believe that there is a very thin
veil of a difference between them that has everything to do with
presentation and nothing to do with method. I believe virtually any
magic trick can be performed as a mental effect if presented as
such.
Not to truly minimize the art form, mentalism is hardly more than
the same magic we all know and love without fancy prop to reveal
that magic has occurred. For example, if you have a spectator
select a card, place it in the deck, shuffle, put it in a glass and
it
rises from the deck, you have a traditional magic reveleation. If you
concentrate, squint your eyes, put your fingers to your temples and
reveal that you sense it is red, it is large, it is a suit card and
it is a
Jack of Hearts without making it physically reveal itself, you have a
mental effect.
My entire point here is that the method of revealing the miracle you
have created makes it either traditional magic or mentalism.
You can even do something like the Passe Passe Bottles as a
mental effect if you talk about dematerializing the bottles using
mind power (a REAL stretch, unless you are doing other telekinetic
effects) or as traditional magic if you make it a "guess where the
bottle is" puzzle.
I find that with only a little effort, virutally any magic effect can
be
made to be a mental effect and vice versa.
Ray
236 From: Ray Haddad
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 5:28pm
Subject: Greetings
Dear Friends,
My introduction:
For those of you who are accomplished mentalists; you know all
about me.
For those of you who are not; practice.
Magically yours,
Ray Haddad
"The great trouble with magicians is the fact that they believe when
they have bought a certain trick or piece of apparatus, and know the
method of procedure, that they are full-fledged mystifiers."
-- Harry Houdini
237 From:
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 9:05pm
Subject: Re: Re: Magic & Mentalism
Let us not forget that the biggest word in psychic entertainment is
"entertainment".
"To know yourself is the power to change your destiny"
238 From:
Date: Fri Jul 30, 1999 10:19pm
Subject: Re: Digest Number 38
In a message dated 7/30/99 5:34:58 PM, you wrote:
<<A few points here, no disrespect intended. . .
None taken. :)
wrote:
> Of course, viewing things from the other side of the coin, if you
are a
> magician doing mentalism as part of your magic show, that material
will be
> viewed as a trick, pure and simple.
How else would we have people view mentalism? It is a trick, and to
ascribe
it to "psychic
powers" is misleading at best.>>
Being a mentalist, I knew this would be the very first
point/counterpoint to
be brought up in this discussion. It always is.
In my view, the biggest difference between mentalism and magic (from
the
spectator's perspective) is that when a magician performs, the
spectator
KNOWS that tricks are happening. What they are seeing is not real,
appearances not withstanding. On the other hand, when a mentalist
performs,
there's always a grain of thought that *allows for the possibility*
that this
(or other events of a similar nature) just might be real. Since there
is no
hard proof that is universally accepted that ESP, psychic powers, etc
DON'T
exist (or that they do, for those who are ready to jump!), and given
that
most people have had experiences that they cannot rationally explain
(be they
coincidence, or whatever), there is at least the tiniest grain of
possibility
that phenomena like what the spectator is witnessing could be real.
I make no claims at all. I simply do what I do and let the chips land
where
they may. It's long been a platitude that if someone believes that
these
phenomena exist, me saying that they don't and that I'm doing tricks
will NOT
change their minds in any way. In fact, it's been shown time and
again that
there will be those who will believe what I'm doing is real
regardless of
what I say or do to dissuade them. Likewise, there are those who will
not
believe this phenomena is possible regardless of who convincingly it
may be
presented. Bottom line here is that people believe whatever they
believe
regardless of what you or I may say.
<<I think it would be best to disavow these people of any notion that
you
actually have
'powers' and simply present your tricks as what they are: excellent
entertainment.>>
Exactly! I claim nothing, they are free to believe anything they
want. The
entertainment value of what mentalists do does not lie in whether
they claim
anything or not, but in how the material is presented. As I stated
above,
presented convincingly (which is the only way I would assume anyone
would
want to present mentalism), people will still believe whatever they
want,
regardless of what you may or may not claim. You are not misleading
anyone if
you claim nothing, especially when they will believe whatever they
want
anyway.
<<I think it is wrong to present oneself as a genuine psychic. What
got me
into
mentalism in the first place was the opportunity to debunk people
like Uri
Geller, Sylvia
Browne, et. al. who profit off of people's credulity.>>
See above.
<<As to the larger topic at hand, I think mentalism and magic can
coexist if
the right tricks
are presented. I've found that the ITR tricks, card tricks such as
the
Invisible Deck and
New Wave Prediction, coin tricks such as Scotch and Soda, and props
like the
Bat are
excellent accompaniments to mentalism routines.>>
Staying with the larger topic and the main point of my previous post,
mixing
magic and mentalism certainly does work, but the bottom line remains
that the
impact of the mentalism is dramatically lessened because the audience
will
view it all as a trick. It's in the mindset of the spectator. If this
mindset
works for you, fine. Run with it. But believe me, the response to a
performance of straight mentalism - no hint of tricks, no claims,
just
powerful performance - the response of this completely buries that of
a magic
performance. There's simply no comparison. Until you have experienced
it
yourself, there's no way to have a truly complete opinion on the
subject.
Again just my opinion. Thanks for listening.
Mark Strivings
239 From: Jim Short
Date: Sat Jul 31, 1999 2:41am
Subject: Mentalism and Disclaimers
There has been a lot of (worthwhile) discussion on this group about
how
we present ourselves as mentalists. I thought I would throw in my 2
cents.
In my opinion, in order to operate ethically as a human being, a
disclaimer is an absolute necessity. I know this is a rather extreme
position, and I welcome discussion. (I am donning the asbestos
underwear as I write this!)
I have heard it said that we have an obligation as entertainers to
provide the strongest theatrical event possible, and that disclaimers
weaken the atmosphere we have just created. I have two responses to
this:
1. Yes, as an entertainer I want to provide the strongest experience
possible. But as a human being, I do not want to promote a
life-changing belief to which I do not subscribe. And even if I did
believe in psychic abilities, 'proving' their existence by deception
is
ethically murky at best. (Replace all of the arguments for 'mentalism'
with 'belief in God' and see how slimy they sound.)
2. I don't even think disclaimers weaken the performance. I have seen
people leave movies in tears, profoundly affected. Guess what? They
knew it was fiction! And which books sell more - fiction, or fact? Oh,
yeah, fiction by a loooong shot!
Another argument I have heard is that if people are stupid enough to
believe in that stuff, that is their problem. By that argument, child
abuse should be ok because hey, kids are incredibly easy to hurt, so
it
is not my problem if it happens!
I have also heard that since we perform in a theatrical setting, it
should be a clue that we are entertainers. The problem with this is
that, for mentalists, many of our venues are not standard vehicles for
entertainers. Personally, I have performed for Elks Club lunches
where,
the week before me they had a lecture on diabetes and the week
following
my performance they had a presentation on investing in stocks. Well,
the diabetes lecture was legit, and so was the stock broker (insert
joke
here), so why not that mind reading guy...? One time I performed at a
magic shop, where the performer before me was a clown and the guy
after
me did 'tricky bottles'. You would think that all of these things
would
be clues that what I did was a performance, and not real. But the next
day I got a call from a lady who asked me if I could use my 'powers'
to
help her find some theater tickets she had lost!
I agree that I want the strongest possible experience for my
spectators
FOR THE DURATION OF THE PERFORMANCE! The movies and books that
strongly
affect people do not (for the most part) attempt to convince you of
their reality beyond the final frame or last page, and these books and
movies can be life-changingly powerful. And for those who say that
traditional magic does not have the same impact on an audience as
mentalism, I say you must never have watched and listened to an
audience
as they leave a Jeff McBride show. What we do is ambiguous enough
that,
without a disclaimer, it seems to me that we are promoting belief
beyond
the boundaries of our performance. I am personally not willing to
cross
into that morally ambiguous area.
I realize that there are people who will believe no matter what I say
or
do. I also know that there are people who will not believe, even if
they are telekinetically lifted into the air. I am not concerned about
either of these groups, since I know I will have no effect on their
beliefs. I am concerned, however, with the vast middle ground who has
not yet formed a firm opinion (much larger than both previous groups
combined, I believe). I know from experience that I have the ability
to
sway their opinion toward belief. I feel I have an obligation to keep
from doing so. Don't get me wrong... I will NEVER reveal methods,
physical or psychological. I will, however, tell people that what I do
does not in any way, shape, or form violate any commonly accepted
scientific beliefs, and that I cannot by any stretch read thoughts,
predict the future, communicate with the dead, or move things with
mind
power alone.
With all apologies to Mark Strivings, whose knowledge and opinions I
hold in the highest regard, I feel that there are times when giving no
disclaimer will be nearly as bad as a direct claim of psychic
abilities. For example, if a spectator asks "can you really read
minds?" and we just smile knowingly, it may (read, 'will probably')
come
across as tacit agreement with the spectator's implied statement -
"What
you did struck me as real, and I want to confirm that observation with
you."
As I stated earlier, I don't think that disclaimers weaken shows -
fiction can actually be more powerful than fact. But even if they do,
I
am willing to accept a slightly weaker theatrical event for the sake
of
my ethical position. In my opinion, those who promote the belief that
they are psychic PAST THE DURATION OF THE PERFORMANCE have exited the
realm of entertainment and entered the venue of the con man.
As my disclaimer (you knew it had to come!), I will tell you that I
always welcome discussion, and that all of my opinions are constantly
being re-formed. A strong argument can sway my opinion on nearly any
subject. None of my beliefs are cast in stone. Your mileage may vary.
Do not operate in the presence of fire or flame. Ventilate properly.
Do not fold, spindle, or mutilate. Warranty void on days that end in
"y".
jim
not a psychic, but I play one on television
240 From: Derren Brown
Date: Sat Jul 31, 1999 3:27pm
Subject: Magic and Mentalism - more nonsense
I have professionally performed straight mind-reading as well as
mixing it
with magic and agree with Mark that the two can work together, but
that the
impact of just performing mindreading straight (and convincingly) is
generally
the stronger. However, I think it is possible to present a blend of
the two
with enormous impact if the routining and presentation allow for it.
Most
spectators are aware that a lot of psychological manipulation is
occurring
during a magic trick. If you get in conversation with most spectators
they will
generally find this area of skill more interesting than sleight-of-
hand.
Especially if you exaggerate wildly (within the bounds of
plausibility) your
use of those skills. Once they are enraptured by your ability to
manage what
they see and feel, then a series of strong mind-reading effects will
be seen as
a utilisation of those purely psychological skills - what Banachek
calls
'psychological direction'. This, I think, is what people really find
interesting. Maybe this is because I find it interesting myself and
my style of
presentation communicates that. With a background as a hypnotist, I
use
trancework in my mindreading and can talk a lot of nonsense about
subliminal
suggestion and provide a more satisfying answer to the effects than
saying I'm
psychic.
This is more than a patter line - it is flattering to the audience's
intelligence and appears to allow them into the workings of the
effects without
spelling anything out - indeed it enhances the effects as the specs
are happy
to believe there is a genuinely interesting and even enviable skill
behind them
rather than just chicanery. And it allows magic and mentalism to meet
in
performance, as they become two different applications of the same
type of
skill. As long as you let them feel that they are entering something
a little
more special when you come to do the mindreading/mentalism, and as
long as you
don't desire to explicitly insist that you are psychic, I think
blending the
two thus and with this type of presentational angle detracts little
from the
performance of mentalism. (Incidentally, I'm not suggesting that you
spell out
that you are using this psychological manipulation. It is enough
normally to
hint in the right way so that they feel they are working that out for
themselves. But I always make sure I have a 'confidential' chat with
the most
interested spectator afterwards where I am apparently a little more
open about
my techniques).
Of course, the upshot of this is that some of the effects - especially
prediction effects - you can only attempt to explain through the use
of
suggestion and so on. A few limp attempts at explaining them away
whilst
denouncing any psychic explanation will have them believing that you
must be
psychic after all and don't want to face it. Oops.
Briefly, my thoughts on that man who bends cutlery. Let us call him
Urine
Smeller. I met him at a booksigning event and during question time
made a
comment that I would like to repeat here. Namely that I am a big fan,
and that
the tradition of con-artists is a fascinating, delightful and quite
noble one.
Also, the figure of the charismatic fraud is an important archetype
in a decent
society. Of course, the movement to expose fake spiritualists and the
like is
just as longstanding and a necessary counterpoint to the existence of
the
frauds it tries to ruin, and long may the battle continue. I said
that as long
as no-one's being harmed, those in the know (ie magicians and the
like) should
enjoy the joke rather than embitter themselves, witlessly trying to
expose him.
I added that if he published his confessions before he died, then
he'd go down
as a major 20th Century icon. He looked a bit sheepish and turned to
another
questioner. Later I was honoured that he addressed a question
directly at me as
he executed the covert mis-shaping of the spoon, and that afterwards
he took me
to one side and gave me the spoon, complete with signature. I have it
on a
bookcase. I find myself laughing along with his boldness, outright
lies and
manipulative nonsense, and think we'd be a lot poorer without him.
Does anyone
else agree? Don't get angry if you don't.
Just, as it goes, my opinion. But I rest comfortable in the knowledge
that I am
right and everybody else is deeply and worryingly wrong.
Be lovely,
Derren
