Combining Steps into Actions

Once you have become familiar with the steps, you will find that performing the tear is not as stop-start as it felt when learning. In practice, many of the steps blend smoothly together into more fluid actions (otherwise, execution of the tear will appear more “choppy” than it should).

The initial tear, the drop, and the rotate should be a single, uninterrupted, continuous movement. In particular, Steps 3 and 4 should be a single motion, not actually a drop followed by a rotate. Rotation of both halves should begin immediately following the previous tear (Step 2), and the “drop” should be more of an “insert”, with the right V-shaped packet being placed inside the left one during the rotation. The end of this insertion, the end of the rotation, and the start of the subsequent opening (Step 5) should occur simultaneously. Then the open/tear/deposit/rotate sequence happens as a fluid whole, as do the final two open/tear/deposit actions. So: fewer than half a dozen differentiated motions.

Peek Practice

While you are practicing the tear, don’t neglect to practice the peek(s) as well. This requires a bit of advance preparation, filling out a number of billets with (different!) short messages, ideally well in advance of the practice session. Then, when you are tearing them, you truly do not know in advance what is written, thus ensuring that your peek is being exercised under more “real-world” conditions.

A Tear for All Reasons

Consider using R2-D2 as your standard way of tearing up bits of paper (receipts, tickets, whatever) that you intend to discard. Not only does this help to internalize and reinforce the actions (thus making them more natural, the key to successful performance), but it provides useful experience in handling different types of paper, and deciding when to choose the ALTERNATE version over the STANDARD one.

And, unlike with other techniques, using R2-D2 results in paper that is torn uniformly and completely (given that this is one of its development criteria), yielding no “big’ pieces, suiting privacy/security needs as well.

Combining ALTERNATE Steps into Actions

A combining motion similar to that described on page 22 applies to the ALTERNATE version of the tear as well, though it is more difficult to describe. Steps 7·A and 8 can be combined by simultaneously adjusting the two torn packets as follows:

Note that the pivoting of the right-hand packet can actually be started during the preceding tear (Step 6). At the conclusion of the dual adjust¬ments, drop the left-hand packet atop the right-hand one, which will result in the same post-Step-8 arrangement as was achieved with the individual steps. You may want to experiment with this a bit to reassure yourself that this is indeed the case, and that you are performing the motions correctly. Once again, the goal is a simple, fluid movement, as opposed to a series of stops and starts.

Which Version is “Better”?

R2-D2 was developed for use with my own personal choice of billet: the regular business card (for the reasons expounded on page 10). There is no reason not to use it with other billet types, given the proper considerations, but it is useful to fully understand and appreciate the scopes of the two handling versions.

I have used R2-D2 with many different business cards, and only rarely has the STANDARD version not worked easily and effectively. The sole exceptions are the occasional very cheap, flimsy cards, with the grain running in the short direction. In all cases, it was obvious before trying it that the STANDARD version was likely to be an iffy proposition. So I would say that if you are using business cards, you should be able to use the STANDARD version in pretty much all cases. If you are having trouble, I would suggest a careful studying of the material on page 21, and some additional practice. Don’t give up too easily (have you completed your 1000 tears yet?), and remember that worthwhile skills are acquired, not revealed.

If you are not using business cards, but rather some other sort of paper, then the ALTERNATE version — which does not exploit the stiffness of the paper to enable the openings in Steps 9 and 12 — is more likely (but certainly not guaranteed) to be your handling of choice. The ALTERNATE handling is not quite as deceptive as the STANDARD one, due to the unbalanced nature of the billet during the openings and tears (i.e., you have a single layer of paper in the left hand, and seven layers in the right, violating criterion K on page 7). This is not overly difficult to conceal, however, thus a fairly modest price to pay for a functional alternative.

Index cards lie somewhere between the extremes of business cards and random pieces of paper; the quality of the card and direction of the grain will determine which of the R2-D2 versions provides the better solution.

Ultimately, I think it’s a mistake to be overly rigid in this regard, always choosing the same version. It’s a simple enough matter to acquire skill in the use of both techniques, choosing the appropriate one as the performing conditions dictate.

More precisely, I believe that the R2-D2 framework should be considered a multifunctional platform for billet tears, as there remain still other useful modifications to be explored!

R2-D2 as a Basic Centre Tear

if you simply need a modest single-word peek, and not the large image view that R2-D2 provides? This is easily accomplished by placing a single writing line just slightly below the midpoint of the billet, as illustrated here:

I use this approach with my version of John Wells’ delightful “Barfly’s Billet Test”, and find it quite effective. In applications such as this, of course, you need only the first peek in the R2-D2 tearing sequence.

Don’t agonize over getting the line perfectly positioned, or precisely where the participant will write. Most of the information content in letterforms is contained in their upper halves. Consequently, even if a significant portion of the lower letter bits were to be destroyed during the tear, you’d likely still be able to read the message with little difficulty. For example:

The Participant Folds the Billet

For a more “hands-off”, the initial two R2-D2 folds — being simple, straightforward, and conventional — can be left to the participant, immediately following the writing process. It’s almost impossible for the first fold to be done incorrectly, though miming the closing of a book (by folding the palms together) will encourage the correct procedure.

It is possible for the second fold to be made incorrectly, in the counter-intuitive direction (though again, appropriate hand motions will suggest the correct form). Note that it matters not whether this fold is done from the bottom up or the top down: the result is identical in both cases. All that’s important is that the fold be made towards the participant.

The only real downside to this approach is that the initial fold may end up strongly creased (hurrying the procedure will help to reduce this possibility). With a decently stiff billet paper, however, this should prove of little consequence.

Stealing Centres: The Delayed Read

Since its introduction by Al Baker, the real-time read — with its clean, uncluttered handling — has generally been preferred by mentalists. Some performers (and some performing situations), however, demand the use of a “delayed read”, retaining the “hot” portion of the billet in the hand for reading at a later time, presumably under conditions offering less scrutiny, stronger cover, and/or further removed in time from the overt manipulation of the paper.

Fortunately, R2-D2 provides an extremely versatile framework in support of such alternate usages, and a delayed read is but another of its capabilities. Even those who normally choose the real-time approach should find this of value, remembering that the skilled “jazz” mentalist is prepared to adjust procedure to cope with any performing situation.

Following Step 5, one is in a perfect position to steal the entire “hot zone” (i.e., the combined target areas) of the billet by using either thumb to slide the top piece into a finger palm. For that matter, Step 5 can be modified such that you open out only the outer V-shaped portion of the billet; this gives you similar palming access, but with a more compact (folded) piece to conceal.

If one wishes to steal out only the upper or lower target area, this can be done following Step 6, choosing whichever piece (the upper portion is the one on the left) you wish to retain in the palmed position. Or, using the ALTERNATE version of the tear, either/both of the two target pieces (which end up on the outside faces of the packet) can be stolen as and when appropriate.

Just be cognizant of the treble downsides of any delayed read approach:

1. The hand (with its palmed centre) is no longer “clean”;
2. The resulting pieces can’t be left with the audience (as some of them are missing); and
3. The (visible) volume of the pieces is significantly reduced, so care must be taken that this is not perceived by the onlookers.

Inverting the Peeks

A strong feature of R2-D2 is its relentlessly ordinary appearance: there are but four simple tears, from top to bottom centre, across the width (not length) of the billet, with resulting halves recombined in a consistent fashion, and no aberrational actions that could trigger a subconscious suggestion of something being amiss. I’m strongly disinclined to suggest any modifications to the sequence that would negate this benefit. That said, there is one small change that produces a potentially useful result, and is pretty close to undetectable when viewing the tear sequence.

This will mostly be of interest — and possible benefit — to those who need but a single peek of the upper target area, and would prefer that peek to occur at the final (fourth) tear, rather than the penultimate (third) one. If you have no such requirement, you’ll be better served by skipping the rest of this section, as it will only add confusion, with no concomitant benefit.

Step 8·I — Rotate

For those still with me, this “inverted” version of the tear is executed simply by replacing “Step 8 — Rotate” in the original sequence with the following “pivot” motion:

This single-step adjustment will invert the order in which the upper and lower target areas are exposed during the tear. The pivot move is very easily accomplished, and although it departs from what one might term “natural”, it’s unlikely to be detected by any but the most intense observer.

Inverting the order of the peeks in the ALTERNATE version is equally simple, by making the pivot around a different axis, as depicted overleaf:

Personally, I limit my usage to the STANDARD and ALTERNATE versions as described previously: they are ultimately the most natural in appearance (and, for me, the most utilitarian). And I prefer to minimize (my) potential confusion. But these “inverted peeks” do provide interesting options, and will certainly offer value to some R2-D2 users.

A Mnemonic Observation

Note that during the various diagonal pivot operations described in these variations, it is always the left side of the packet that moves toward you around the pivot axis.

Also, the STANDARD pivot axis is from top left to bottom right, while the ALTERNATE pivot axis is from bottom left to top right.

Keeping these rules in mind will help you better assimilate the various optional handlings, should you decide to make use of them all.

This section of the monograph adds some elegant touches, clever handlings, and useful advice contributed by a pair of skilled billet workers who have elected to employ R2-D2 in their own work. Appreciate that both these contributors use index cards, which are easy for audiences to see, and yield pieces that seem large enough to obviate trickery.

From John Wells

A Propitious Peek

Cerebral mentalist John Wells has very graciously granted me permission to relate a subtlety that he originally developed for his own billet tear, but now uses with R2-D2.

He performs his peeks not during the tears, but following them. That is, he keeps his eyes averted while the paper is being torn, then — as his hands bring the pieces together — takes a fleeting glimpse when they are close enough to be comfortably read with a single glance. John notes that it takes a bit of practice to see the pieces as a single image (and be aware that his use of index cards definitely facilitates this technique), but the disarming timing of the peek makes the effort well worthwhile.

A Peek Prescription

John cautions that, when performing peeks in general, you not look directly at the paper. Instead, look at something else, while ensuring that the area to be peeked is included within your line of sight. When handing the torn pieces to the participant, he often uses the playful (and misdirecting) line, “I need you to swallow these.”

Index Insights

He also observes that, when using traditional lined index cards, the (typical) red line will be located at the top, facing you, when the folded billet is correctly oriented for the tear. And if you use the ALTERNATE version of the tear (which John prefers for consistent results with index card stock), that line will be in the same location when properly positioned for the tear preceding the first peek.

From Tom Jorgenson

Tear for Two

Tom notes that R2-D2 is the only tear he knows of in which one can have two different people write information down on the same billet: it doesn’t have to be the same person writing in both areas. So you have two people, two reveals, and — with the proper routining — two different effects. All taken care of in the same almost-instant tear.

To this he adds that, following the tear, you can have the second person drop the pieces into a coin envelope, and later “psychometrize” that envelope to tune into both participant’s heads.

Here’s a further logical disconnect from Tom’s fertile imagination: fail to reveal the thoughts of the second person (getting not the wrong message, but rather no message at all: perhaps the participant in question is better suited to “receiving” than “sending”?), but then have her whisper the name/word/whatever to a stranger … and nail that stranger’s thought. This can appear even more amazing, especially since the third person hasn’t written anything down. It’s nice to follow up at some later point by coming back to the second person (the “receiver”) and doing something that involves her receiving a thought.

Tom’s Twist

Here’s an alternative handling for the second peek in the STANDARD version of R2-D2. It sacrifices some of the consistency and rhythm of the original, but offers another option for those using paper that gives them trouble with the second opening. And it’s a tad faster. In a sense, it represents a sort of combination of the STANDARD and ALTERNATE versions, with the first peek identical to the former, but the second peek positioned as for the latter, offering the consequent advantages of both (though at a price). Tom explains, in his own (very slightly edited) words:

Jorgensonian Justifications

… for the peek moment (and hinging on the use of index cards):

… for tearing up the billet:

The other important criterion for peek timing is that it should occur after onlookers have been thoroughly convinced that no chicanery is possible. So, prior to any covert action, there should be at least a couple of fair, open (at the finger tips, surrounded), clean, down-the-middle tears that can be executed with eyes fully averted, to assure the audience that nothing has been seen, and the information is truly destroyed.

This readable area can be made larger during the second initial fold, by bringing up the bottom edge to fall a trifle short of the top one. Be wary of adjustments such as this, however, as they can all too easily detract from R2-D2’s casual appearance if not used circumspectly.

I’m strongly disinclined to suggest any modifications to the sequence that would negate this benefit. That said, there is one small change that produces a singularly useful result, and is pretty close to undetectable when viewing the tear sequence.

This will mostly be of interest when needing only a single peek of the upper target area (per page 28), and preferring that peek to occur at the final (fourth) tear, rather than the penultimate (third) one. I use it myself for exactly this purpose, as it enables me to turn my head away (emphasizing that my eyes are fully averted) for three full-view tears, at which point the billet seems hopelessly destroyed — and any suspicions of the onlookers are fully satisfied — prior to anything untoward taking place.

This single-step adjustment will invert the order in which the upper and lower target areas are exposed during the tear. The pivot move is very easily accomplished (in fact, I find the finger movement a bit simpler than that in the STANDARD tear), and although it departs slightly from consistency, it’s effectively undetectable by even the most intense observer.

These “inverted peeks” allow the entertainer to advance beyond criterion F (on page 7, which demands only two legitimate tears prior to the peek) in order to optimize what Bruce Bernstein has termed “the best time psychologically” to read hidden information [That is, after intense onlooker scrutiny has been appeased. This observation can be found in Bruce’s magnum opus, Unreal (Chicago, 2012, p. 215)].