talkmagic.co.uk

While working at weddings, dinner parties, restaurants etc., my most popular effect is having a punter think of their favourite card, find that card in a pack, and then I do a spot of mind-reading and reveal to them what their favourite card is. It has always been a good effect and a great way to end a short table-hopping routine.

Lately I've been experimenting with adding palmistry, tarot, and cold reading more & more into my performances. At the end of the above routine I now read the palm of the punter, do a full personality profile, and then reveal their favourite card based on the info gleamed from the palm. The reaction this routine now gets is amazing. People are literally bowled over.

Needs to be presented with gusto and belief, but you already know that. The great thing with that little routine is that after I've read the original punter's palm and revealed the card, you can guarantee that I will have at least 30 minutes work simply reading palms. At weddings it's not unusual to have a queue of bridesmaids and assorted mothers waiting patiently in line to have their palm "done".

I know that my posts always seem to be banging on about the power of palmistry/tarot/cold reading, but honestly - it's powerful stuff and makes the magic highly personal to the punter. Plus joanne public loves it, she really does.

I agree, absolutely.

Adding a psychological depth to an effect makes it harder, even impossible for the Lay person to dismiss it as a 'trick'.

This is something 'Pure Effect' and 'Absolute Magic' have hammered into me, and something I'm very interested in.
I'm currently reading 'The Full Facts Book of Cold Reading', which is superb.

And your trick sounds brilliant.

For gods sake either do magic or do mentalism so you aren't screwing yourself (along with the guys that do specialize).

If you want to be a Reader and taken seriously you need to get away from the sponge balls and card tricks otherwise you will generally be seen as some shmuck playing people for fools...

Sorry, but this is one of my biggest pet peeves when it comes to the big trend in everyone doing "Mentalism"... ten years ago you could barely find anyone that knew the first thing about this side of magic and now everyone thinks they are one... it's maddening!

Sorry Craig, but I think that biting response was a little uncalled for.

If you are an enthusiast of mentalism surely you'd be happy that more people becoming interested in this area of magic? You don't see card magicians looking down at people who only know the simplest of tricks because they 'think they are one' - they support them and are happy that they show an interest?

The idea of people incorporating elements of mentalism being seen as 'schmucks' is rather derogatory, and I'm sure at least in the eyes of the spectators, completely untrue, especially judging from the reactions that the magic wand says that he has. There are numerous famous magicians out there that use combinations of magic and mentalism, and do so with great effect; it seems that you are a little too quick to pigeon hole people, and take offence when people don't want to stay in the same hole.

I also don't see a problem with mixing magic and mentalism and I've done so plenty of time with great effect. You do have to make sure that the timing of effects are right, you can't go straight froma sponge ball effect to a deep and dark mentalist effect. But as long as everything flows and gels, it can work really well.

The problem is that the underlying premise of mentalism is very different from that of magic. By combining the two, you're taking something which can be extremely powerful and turning it into a puzzle - a trick.

I think it in one of Bob Cassidy's books that he says the difference between the two is that with magic somone asks you 'How did you do that'. With mentalism someone is more likely to ask you whether you were born with that gift.

sounds nice.

are there any books on palming reading etc?

and what is cold reading??

Craig, perhaps I should explain my thinking in mixing "magic" & "mentalism". I have actually been doing "readings" since my early 20's (I'm in my 40's now). I have been involved in the conjuring side of things for only the past 5 years, and have been a professional (ie full-time, it pays my bills and puts food on my family's plates) "magician" for the past 2 years.

Inspired by Pure Effect, Absolute magic and many of the fantastic postings on this forum (including some wonderful stuff posted free & gratis by Craig himself), I decided to see if it was possible to combine the "conjuring" side of things with the readings I have been doing for 20 years to create a powerful form of magical entertainment. I have been very pleased with the results.

Of course it would be totally inapropriate to do a sponge ball routine, pull a rabbit out of a hat, and then read someone's tarot cards or palm. That would be stupid. However a few psychic "experiments" with a pack of esp cards and a pack of Bikes, and the mood is totally set for a palm reading. The presentation is of course all important. From the moment I sit down with an audience my patter revolves around ghosts, psychics and mediums, so that when I offer to read the palm to divine the chosen card it seems the most natural thing in the world. I will generally work any event with nothing more than a pack of esp cards and a pack or two of Bikes. And perhaps a pack of tarot in case someone requests a reading. That's it. That's all I need - no rope, no sponge balls, no TT, IT, exploding pens or flash paper. Not because there isn't a time & place for all those props, but simply because they wouldn't fit into my routines and my presentation.

And it works. If it didn't, I wouldn't do it. And not once have I had a punter complain that I'm mixing magic with mentalism, or magic with readings. Funny that. I guess the truth is that the average man in the street doesn't know the difference between magic, mentalism, and readings. He doesn't care. As long as he's entertained, he's happy. And if he's happy, so is the person that booked me which means the liklihood of me getting further bookings increases.

I really cannot for the life of me see why we as "magical entertainers" should worry about mixing magic with mentalism. For heaven's sakes, who gives a damn? Certainly not the man-in-the-street - the very person we're paid to entertain. I've invested a hell of a lot of hours in learning all aspects of my trade. I think I've earned the right to choose how to mould my routines, and what areas of my craft to include in those routines.

As for the poster who asked "what's cold reading", do a search on this site or Google and you'll find all the answers you need! For those interested in learning more about palmistry to add a touch of the mentals to your routines, I would suggest "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Palmistry" as a great starting point. Doubtless this book would be dismissed by the more serious minded readers (there's probably an out of print Victorian tome that one should read whilst standing on your head at midnight beside a babbling brook), but there you go. You pays your money, you takes your choice.

Magic & mentalism - always up for a good scrap aren't they?

themagicwand wrote:Magic & mentalism - always up for a good scrap aren't they?

You never know. Ian Paisley met Dr Sean Brady, the Archbishop of Armagh, at Stormont this week. I saw it on News 24 last night and nearly choked on me cocoa. They shared a joke. After decades of hate, terror and murder, they actually sat down and shared a joke.

Tomo wrote:After decades of hate, terror and murder, they actually sat down and shared a joke.

There's hope for us all!

themagicwand wrote:

Tomo wrote:After decades of hate, terror and murder, they actually sat down and shared a joke.

There's hope for us all!

Coming together is always good. Sectarianism breeds wasted hope. Dunno really. Just thinking aloud and it seemed interesting.

Tomo wrote:

themagicwand wrote:

Tomo wrote:After decades of hate, terror and murder, they actually sat down and shared a joke.

There's hope for us all!

Coming together is always good. Sectarianism breeds wasted hope. Dunno really. Just thinking aloud and it seemed interesting.

Mixing different styles makes the end product stronger. A bit like mongrel dogs that are far healthier and live longer than pedigree dogs. Things that are too "pure" tend to get weak and sickly. Everything in life can benefit from an influx of different blood and different opinions.

themagicwand wrote:Of course it would be totally inapropriate to do a sponge ball routine, pull a rabbit out of a hat, and then read someone's tarot cards or palm. That would be stupid.

Absolutely.

Just to reiterate on what MagicWand said, mixing magic and mentalism may irritate some purists, but audiences love it.
When performing, i mostly use cards, and therfore often end with a little mentalism involving cards. It goes down a storm!
There is NOTHING wrong with that in my eyes.

I think there is a difference between a magic performance with some "mental" aspects, which is fine and infact very effective, and trying to do a full on, genuine mentalist show with serious readings, seance effects etc.

In all honesty, I feel that "pure mentalists" - the type who are aiming for that "were you born with this gift?" as opposed to "how do you do that?" on the whole have slightly larger egos than I care for. Even Banachek, a hugely respected mentalist, advertises himself as "the man who fooled the scientists" - or, to put it another way, "the man who - through skill/sleight of hand/whatever - led the scientists to believe he really had powers of the mind"... implicitly, the man who uses secret methods but leaves to no other explanation, so that it seems he has powers of the mind. If you see his tapes, he presents things as a mystery - yes, there's a whole lot of mental spiel, but then there's a whole lot of spiel to magic too. It's part of the entertainment.

If it's possible to be a successful mentalist whilst not claiming outright to have paranormal abilities, I don't have a huge amount of sympathy for those who are sulking because these magicians doing mentalism are making people think that they're actually not some incredible mental cosmic star child, and that actually they've just practiced hard or found a niche in a certain area of entertainment. Because be it magic or mind reading, or even clairvoyants, we have a word for people who use their skills to try to make others truly think there is something paranormal about their abilities: that word is charlatan, and a lot of famous and skilled performers have had a lot to say about that.

Back to magicians performing mentalism - you force a card, and then reveal that you know which card they picked through some magical method. That is not a huge lot different to forcing an ESP symbol or peeking a design, and pretending that you are receiving the image via "mental waves" etc. Infact, the effect is almost the same, but the presentation is different. So whilst going to a Paul Daniels show and a Richard Osterlind show may be two different experiences, I *do* think there is a satisfying grey area in the middle in which, as long as it is well performed, magicians and mentalists are free to experiment in. I like Sankey's description of his "mentalist-influenced" effects; "it's magic, but with a cerebral factor, with that extra *squeeeeeze* (makes brain-squeezing gesture!)" And I'm afraid I don't think that people who are primarily magicians should be prevented from this extra and very effective factor just because it might make a few people think, "hey, maybe that other guy isn't really reading minds after all..."

"do not colour one man’s world with another man’s palette"

aah this old chesnut...

i urge anyone who is interested in the performance and perception of magic and mentalism to read Geist...it puts forward a very good argument; as well as containing some very powerful effects and methods...

what labels we stick on ourselves and each other eh...

i do find it interesting that whenever a magic is mentioned, its always "tricks" and "sponge balls"...its like saying mentalism is just "swami" and "centre-tears"...

so i feel a slight waffle coming on...

how many people have you sat down in a bar with and said to them "hmmm do you know what a mentalist is?" they will no doubt reply - "well, there's that guy that gets on the train and speaks to himself...is that one"...its a label...a label to explain to others in the field...nothing more nothing less...i really cant stand them...

mentalists don't use cards...well, they do actually...derren brown, andy nyman, kenton knepper, corinda, annemann...they all do/have...

i find that in general, labels also constrict you...you have no room to manouver around, you can play less...

What is Andrew Mayne for instance? He's given us quite a few "odd" effects...what label to you want to stick on his forehead? Bizzarist? But he also does stage illusions...so illusionist? But he also does close up card and other stuff...so is he close-up?

It makes me feel quite sad when i see people so keen to keep things "like its always been", and to a point, they have....well, a point...

but not always...look at the French language...they have a "quality control" on their language, it kicks out certain slang and "absorbed" words and because of that - it's very slowly dying...

The english language absorbs though - we do not translate "croissant", we do not translate "sushi"...

It has parallels (i think) with magic in general. Years before, if you were lucky, you got taken on, tutored by someone...so that you could then forward the craft, the art, become like them, but add your twists to it as you progress...

And nowadays, the progression is a hybrid...a hybrid of arts. Lets look at the mighty Derren Brown. Suggestion, card work, high theatre, br**nw*** deck, exposure of old spiritualist methods, good old fashioned fakery, acting and all sorts of other things into the pot or cauldron to create something new...

He is more than a mentalist. He is more than a label. I feel those of us who take it seriously, who want to become what's inside us as a performer...well, advice is great when its constructive..but ultimately, everyone has their own path to take...

and some dont always like treading where others already have...

To dismiss someone else's journey i think is dangerous and to a point, rather snobbish and churlish...

Learn by doing, what you define - you create...WYSIWYG, whatever you choose to do, is you and you alone...

Im just as entertained by Lennart Green as i am by Max Maven, just as im enthralled by Eugene Burger (bizarrist/card-worker/sponge ball routines) as i am by Jerry Sadowitz...

I couldnt give two honks on the horn of plenty what others label or call them...i could sit with them round a table and be taken on an emotional roller-coaster ride by any or all of them...glee/joy/surprise/shock/fear/ any or all of my emotions...

Hendrix was once asked "do you consider what you're doing anything similar to Cream?" and he said "no, we're just trying to get our own thing together - a kinda freakish blues...we do our own thing..."

Its the same with magic, two pairs of hands (normally), one mind, one way of performing...if you don't like it...fair enough, but don't damn them for trying to find their own way to perform...


ahhhh waffle over....