talkmagic.co.uk

hey guys.
there's one thing that all ways gets me thinking. and it's the works of such people like derren brown etc. like mentalism and phsycological "magic"
I'm a card magician, every now and then i'll whip out a coin trick, but generally, i stick to cards.
however, the reason I'm starting this thread is because i would love to be able to do mentalist tricks.
i have one question, do you have to study up on phsycology and what not to become a mentalist magician like derren brown, or are they're books, gaffs or what not? I'm new to this area of magic.

thanks

First thing is read this by Craig Browning and really consider what he is saying. Then get a copy of 13 steps to mentalism.

http://www.talkmagic.co.uk/ftopic11429.php

I guess you don't really have to study psychology, unless you really want to become proffesional at it.. and make up your own tricks.. than you have be able to figure what psychology is needed to make the trick more real, how to mess with the spectators the best

but if you just want to have a couple of good mentalist tricks next to your card magic to extend your repertior.. than DVD's are great..
DVD's like psy-series 1 -4 by banachek..
On these DVD's you can see all kinds of tricks by banachek, and after that he explains them, and goes into the psychology of the trick..

Never Start with banachek! you need to slowly build up to that.

I have found studying psychology to be quite useful actually - the more knowledgeable you are on various branches then the better you can 'bluff' if you are indeed bluffing - and knowing that you know that you know (:shock:) what you are talking about is a great confidence boost.

As well as this should people go and look up things you have mentioned they won't find out that you were just lying. As well as this if people ask you more about your techniques you will be able to talk better on them.

Finally if you want to be seen as being quite real then it's often best to shift your attitude away from calling them mental 'tricks' to mental 'experiments'.

Most of the classic books will be a total let down if you're starting from the idea that this is a particularly clean branch of magic based on psychology: it's not.

My own route into mentalism then into magic was through a love of psychology and wanting to go further. Derren Brown came along and people were asking me if I could do things like he could, but I quickly discovered that in mentalism the psychology is really bound up in the presentation of what can be fairly standard tricks. Very few mentalism effects have psychology as their basis, however. They are rooted in the same mundane techniques as normal magic.

So, yes there are plenty of books, DVDs, gaffs and other tools, but at the end of the day, if you want mental effects that play as clean as you see the likes of Brown performing, maybe you should start with a clean trick you know well, strip it down and build a mental presentation for it. Then it'll be in our own style and handling.

If you want a good introduction to mentalism for not much money to assess the field, "Self-Working Mental Magic" by Karl Fulves is an excellent and cheap start. It covers esp effects, mind over matter, book tests, slate work, stooges, etc.

you might want to read The Amazing Kreskin too...written by The Amazing Kreskin funnily enough...

There are some nice clips of Kreskin on YouTube now, too.

Just an an FYI... Mentalists Don't do Tricks! This is what magicians do.

The psychological dynamics associated with Mentalism begins with how you look at it, how you study it and the words you use in defining it. In other words, the real psychological niche is how it affects YOU as the performer; as long as you continue to look at what we do as being a "trick" you will never step across the threshold of believability. As Lee Earle has stated a million times over the years, "Magicians have an agreement with the audience in which trickery and illusion are known and while amazement is for certain, it is part of our agreement of disbelief that makes it fun. On the other hand the Mentalist invokes belief; the illusions we create come from a place of plausibility, logic, faith, etc. We deliberate manipulate personal perception and negate (to a strong level) the idea of deception."

Sounds a bit contradictory when you stop and look at how ardently so many strive to "debunk" the crooked Psychics out there, but this is part of the art and psychology of Mentalism -- learning to walk the tightrope that is suspended between theater and charlatanism.

There is an acute (albeit, a recent development) difference between the Psychic Showman (Mental Magician) and the "Truests" of Mentalism; this newer species leaning more towards the corn-filled lines, antics and attitudes of the traditional magician vs. embrace of the deeper, more analytical aspects of Mentalism. This is partly due to fear but more greatly due to personal lethargy -- the desire to do "a few mentalism tricks" vs. learning how to properly present and exploit the art of being a Mentalist.

Bear in mind, the only illusion a Mentalists creates is the image he/she builds around his/her self -- the public's perception of what we are -- for this is entirely different than what they see when they think of Magic or Magician and it has nothing to do with "tricks".

One Last Note (a personal gripe, but an important fact...) Whether you do magic, card tricks or mentalism the public will judge you based on your skills with words and as a communicator. Intellect is always your number one Ace and yet so many young people seem to elect to take actions that negate such; refusing to use proper punctuation techniques in their written words and being rather sloppy when it comes to the spoken word and proper grammer construction. You may wish to moan and whine over this bit of nit-picking but take a look at who is successful in life and who is not; consider who in global history has affected humankind the most and you will find it to be those that were skilled in the arts of communication and presentation not the lethargec and voluntarily dim-witted. So take some pride and apply just a hint of effort in the act of presenting yourself in a more educated manner that is respectful not only of yourself but those you are appealing to as well.

Craig Browning wrote:There is an acute (albeit, a recent development) difference between the Psychic Showman (Mental Magician) and the "Truests" of Mentalism; this newer species leaning more towards the corn-filled lines, antics and attitudes of the traditional magician vs. embrace of the deeper, more analytical aspects of Mentalism. This is partly due to fear but more greatly due to personal lethargy -- the desire to do "a few mentalism tricks" vs. learning how to properly present and exploit the art of being a Mentalist.

That reads very judgementally, Craig, if you'll excuse the portmanteau'd pun and don't mind me saying. Isn't it really just a matter of the performer's style rather than what you percieve as lethargy? I mean, someone might be well versed in what you call the more analytical aspects of mentalism and not wish to be a "mentalist" but to incorporate their understanding into their own style.

Personally, I'm happy to straddle several boundaries, study them in depth and cherry pick the best of all worlds rather than confine myself to one. That way, I can synthesize something uniquely mine, which is what I think I mean really.

I'm a hybrid too...all wrapped up in stories and coincidences, if cards tell the story, so be it...

52 cards, 26 letters, 78 tarot...

52+26=78 - complete rubbish, but its working for me....

thanks guys.
im not sure if i follow some of it. but thanx anyway

Tomo wrote:

Craig Browning wrote:There is an acute (albeit, a recent development) difference between the Psychic Showman (Mental Magician) and the "Truests" of Mentalism; this newer species leaning more towards the corn-filled lines, antics and attitudes of the traditional magician vs. embrace of the deeper, more analytical aspects of Mentalism. This is partly due to fear but more greatly due to personal lethargy -- the desire to do "a few mentalism tricks" vs. learning how to properly present and exploit the art of being a Mentalist.

That reads very judgementally, Craig, if you'll excuse the portmanteau'd pun and don't mind me saying. Isn't it really just a matter of the performer's style rather than what you percieve as lethargy? I mean, someone might be well versed in what you call the more analytical aspects of mentalism and not wish to be a "mentalist" but to incorporate their understanding into their own style.

Personally, I'm happy to straddle several boundaries, study them in depth and cherry pick the best of all worlds rather than confine myself to one. That way, I can synthesize something uniquely mine, which is what I think I mean really.

I do fully understand what and why your are saying this TOMO but my statement stands and no, it is not being judemental, rude or untrue. When we strive to serve more than one master we will fail one or all in that we can not express honest dedication. The scenario you are promoting is a "having the cake and eating it too" concept that many want to hold to and yes, just like you younger guys I did the same thing in my youth but only to a very limited degree... my specialty was large scale illusions for many years with a "minor" in escapology (so to speak). Over time the focus shifted from the type of props I focused on to the kind of "feelings" I wanted my audience to know -- the surreal and macabre proving my primary. My course throughout my career however, has always been to create the most "real" experiences I could for folks, which is why I so love the deeper aspects of Mentalism and the more occult "sensation" it tends to play with in the mind of the participant.

The other reason I don't support the "Jack of all trades" style of magical performer in today's movement is the fact that no one person can do it all... it's just not logical to even try (and the gods know I have tried... I was constantly chewed out by my elders because I was too diverse at times and not focused... and they were talking about one single act without all the other stuff, just "the act" that's it!) But there is a more mundane reason why I defend this point; not all of us can do fancy card work or think on our feet with the comedy and quick come-backs or support the insanity of a big stage act... no two of us are alike! Our skill levels, discipline, aptitude, etc. are vary and for this reason I can sustain the idea of getting a taste of everything but in the long run, to develope the discipline (I know, that's a dirty word to most in today's world) in perfecting and being an expert in one primary field that may be seconded (in time) in an alternate.

The biggest reason for my being a hard-liner on the Truest idea of mentalism is the simplest and one of the oldest truths behind Mentalism since its inception; the public knows that magicians do tricks, it is expected and fully supported -- they know it is not real and we don't try to tell them otherwise. When it comes to mentalism our advantage has been and will always remain the investment of belief made by the laiety in what we do; our job is to allude to the possibility that what we demonstrate is very much real, be it as the result of some kind of paranormal influence or scientific logic... either way BELIEF is the catalyst behind our success in presenting it. In this alone there is a stark contrast between these kindred art forms but, psychologically speaking, when the public knows you pull bunnies from hats and can readily manipulate a deck of playing cards they will not lend to you this investment of support e.g. their reaction will be "how do you do that" vs. "stop it, you're scaring me with this stuff" or even "you know you're evil and this is the devil's work..." (I really like that one, it tells me I'm doing my job right...)

Learning to find your own footing and being able to walk that tightrope is the biggest "trick" to the whole of effective Mentalism otherwise you will never come to know the advantages the pure mentalist knows in the working world, nor will you be viewed as anything other than a magician that uses tricks to fool people into thinking he's psychic... in other words, a laughing stock.

I know that sounds rather rude, but I've heard far too many lay people complain about this very thing time and again and why it turns them off when it comes to magic... they get tired of being played with as fools or marks by cocky magicians. Yet, I can sit with these same folks, have a chat, do some Readings and not slip into one single "trick" and they'll think me a blessed and special person... something that's real and more than a clown sporting a title.

Think about it

Craig Browning wrote:Learning to find your own footing and being able to walk that tightrope is the biggest "trick" to the whole of effective Mentalism otherwise you will never come to know the advantages the pure mentalist knows in the working world, nor will you be viewed as anything other than a magician that uses tricks to fool people into thinking he's psychic... in other words, a laughing stock.

I know your background, Craig, and I appreciate message entirely. If you'll take a moment, I'll state mine. I came from a tarot background via an understanding of applied psychology into a hybrid of various techniques to provide a richer experience for the spectator. In detail, I got a tarot deck and a booklet as a young teenager, and taught myself to do convincing readings for superstitious schoolfriends while also hitting the library to study why it means so much to the spectator from a psychological viewpoint. That's why I know so much about the cognitive biases and logical fallacies that underpin such things as the cluster of effects lumped under "Forer" and go way beyond giddy arguments about who writes the 'best' book. Your reverend friend challenged me to name the books I've read a while back. I didn't respond because what's the point? They're not ones he'll have read, so the only possible reaction would be for him to belittle them. Anyway, increasingly disgusted at myself, I eventually stopped lying to people as I saw it and lost the deck (I was young, and beer and bodies exert a powerful tug on the hormones). After years away, and enjoying the method-free power of applied psychology to create interesting effects, I got back into the mentalism game via the publicity Brown generated with 'Trick of the Mind', but started to realise that my audience want effects based on familiar things they think they understand. Crossing borders also gives far more tools for creating convincing effects. That's why I'll use cards, coins, matches, wooden blocks, anything they feel comfortable with. I've evolved not into being a magician who uses tricks to try to fool people into thinking I'm psychic - a laughing stock as you put it. Rather, I'm introduced as someone who will demonstrate the strange and inexplicable. The reason is that people are left free to decide what it is that happened. Some want to find the method, which is why I strive to create the cleanest effects I can. Others want to believe something intuitive has taken place, which they're also free to do. And believe me, some people can't help but think I'm the real thing who does a few magic tricks on the side - and my understanding of psychology tells me why. My range extends across some very odd boundaries outside of magig including getting served first at a crowded bar, to curing hiccups in an instant to being someone people simply know they can talk to about their innermost psychological quirks. Sometimes, the effect is taking away a fear, other times it's divining a thought. It's all part of "Tomo" as an anthropomorphic idea rather than me as a geezer trying t oconvince anyone of anything. I'm having fun, they're having fun, the benefits are real if people want them, and the environment is a rich one - as a few other TM members have discovered when their own work has crossed boundaries. I even do tarot readings again.

But before you angrily reply, understand that I'm not having a go at you, just stating my history. The point of doing to is to demonstrate that we're all different, our audiences are different, and we're just going to have to agree to disagree about what mentalism is and what it should be, because in a very real sense, the audience decides that for us.

i fully agree with Tomo there...and very eloquently put too may i add...

I feel in general magic people are too caught up in their labels - i am a mentalist therefore i am better than a magician - i am a magician therefore i am better than a juggler ad infinitum -

Those labels will always mean more to (some of) us than it will to the general public...

Whereas it should be seen as no boundaries, no labels, no nothing. A deep and enveloping void of whatever you choose. A label defines who you are in an instant, and i personally don't want that.

I have bizarre/dark leanings, i adore pure puzzling card effects, i straight up am in love with wierd psychic oddities and predictions...and all other things inbetween that catch my eye and mind...

I know there's the old saying "a magician guards an empty box" but there should also be one saying "a mentalist can sometimes be trapped in an empty box"....(that'll neeed some work obviously..)

not only what we define, we create - but we can also constrict...

this is all said with love for all the arts, and respect due to everyone...just my occasional coherent thoughts that's all...