talkmagic.co.uk

buy NLP for dummies...and lie your ass off...

but at least base that lie on a form of truth...

Body language and all that is so 1990's. Personally I prefer methods from the 1890's, so may I present to you:

Palm reading.
Psychic mind reading.
Graphology (that's handwriting analysis dummy).
Psychometry (hold something of the spec's - key, watch - and pick up those crazy vibrations!).
Tea leaf or crystal ball gazing - hey, nobody else is doing it.

Okay, okay, I know. You don't like doing psychic effects coz it preys on the vulnerable or something. You wanna be like DB. So:

Hold the spec's wrists and feel their pulse. No eye movement or anything silly - just feel for when their pulse quickens.

BUT (and here's where I get controversial) you will find that the average spec would rather have their mind read by a psychic than by a body language expert. Believe me. A psychic is interesting and exciting. A body language expert sounds a bit...well...nerdy. Just my experience.

Goodness, I am a bit cranky tonight. Must be coz I'm poorly. Anyway, go play at being body language experts, that's fine. It's just that, well, I think the world has enough of those already. And yes, while we're at it, ignore the suggestions above and keep away from the psychic angle. That's my gig.

Only joking. You can be psychic too if you want to.

Faux hypnotism. Pretend to hypnotise them, ask them to whisper their card into your ear and move your ear to their mouth. The spec doesn't whisper anything but you pretend he did. Reveal the card and explain how the guy can't remember telling you his card because he was hypnotised.

I quite like that actually.

In response to Part-Timer: it wasn't Derren Brown, although I did come across about 10 versions of those books! Hmmm... The only venture into hypnotism is with my tongue placed relatively firmly in cheek that I ask someone to imagine they've momentarily become hypnotised and will start to believe they have just consumed a tab of LSD and are seeing strange hallucinations with these cards...

It's been discussed at length in this topic, but I really don't know about this whole DB stuff, and don't aspire to be like him. Whilst DB is infinitely more charming than David Blaine (i've tremendous respect for all fellow University of Bristol Law graduates), by sheer fact of Brown's popularity and perception by the public, i suppose it can be quite grating when someone you perform on states or thinks you're a Derren Brown wannabe - not that i get assigned to such a pigeon hole, as I am magic based and not mentalism based. Rather, I probably aspire to have the fluidity of Greg Wilson and Dynamo (to name a few), but with my own style of patter that suits me and my personality. (Off topic, but if Dynamo had a different persona, perhaps even "cheeky chappie" given his self proclaimed street culture background, he could be much more engaging, although i think he already is.) But I do have tremendous respect for what DB does, and to an extent may want to cherry pick certain aspects of his presentation for mental magic, but will always wish to keep magic at the forefront and mentalism as a backseat flavour where i feel appropriate or, frankly, as a presentational angle (think of it as those drops of Tabasco sauce).

I agree it would be more interesting to have your mind read by a psychic but I am currently at the bottom of the mentalism rung and its associated arts. I just think it's fun to do, although I'm very aware that body language reading is frowned upon by the magic community. As has been reiterated by MasterCyde however, i subscribe to the school of thought where magic and mentalism are not mutually exclusive, but can in fact enhance the other. For me personally, mentalism is ultimately another way of presenting the same effect such as the ID. You could present it as a straight trick or you could in effect sugar coat it, pouring layer upon layer of sweet dressing on top, sprinkling and caramelising the presentation / verbal routine to the build up. I used to just use it as an opener, and even felt bored of doing it, till i realised i needed some presentational angle to not only maximise what it does, but for me to progress as a magician and performer.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

Ewe! "Wannabees"

I recall how, when I made my arrival to L.A. and the Magic Castle, everyone was trying to either following in the "traditional styling" of Channing Pollock (a.k.a. "The Chavez Clone Act") or they thought they were David Copyfield with a touch of Henningesque tossed in here and there for a few here and there... the "Card Guys" were still trying to be Marlow or Vernon for the most part with one or two thinking themselves Jimmy Grippo...

Now I wasn't a "Close Up Guy" in those days and what I did if and when I did Close-up was (is) very basic stuff, yet I had a certain old curmudgeon named Vernon as well as Paul Daniel and a few others points something out to me... I WAS BEING ME AND NOT TRYING TO BE SOMEONE ELSE and that is why they enjoyed watching me work. It has nothing to do with skill (the gods know, I have little of that) but the fact that I wasn't trying to mimic another act. This was true of numerous others of "the day' i.e. when we were all young punks hustling our butts off here and there and in high hopes of covering rent and something other than Mac & Cheese or Ramon as our primary food group i.e. Franz Harary, John Carney, Joseph Gabriel, etc.

I bring this out only because of the fact that most (far more than not) really do fall into the trap of replicating the style, look and even material associated with another act. Many times we don't "see" that we are doing it but most all are guilty of it in that we tend to strive towards the style and feel we enjoyed when we watched such and such the great doing said routine.

In Mentalism most of the "trench workers" I know here in the states moan and complain greatly over all the 24 hour quick studies jumping into the Dunninger Mold and thinking; tossing all logic and self-identity to the wind. Making matters worse we have ILLUSIONISTS winning major Tv "competitions" as supposed "Mentalists" and said delusion of success is what makes other younger and dumber souls not just think it's ok to feature an appearing car in their act... using it as a revelation to some Bimbo's chosen card and thought of colors, etc.... they don't only think this is "Mentalism" they will fight and argue till they are blue in the face and drawing their last breath, pointing fingers as shmucko the commercial face as a way to justify the fubar.

This (boys & girls) takes us back to some things I said previously (echoing countless others) YOU HAVE TO DO THE STUFF THAT'S YOU and stop, for an example, doing Mentalism just because everyone else has jumped onto the current TREND. If you do Illusions DON'T go out and get an Interlude and Origami or all those other bits EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING, find your own stuff and create your own act that IS NOT what everyone else is doing.

Pardon my meandering thoughts but I think most of you will understand what I'm trying to say and how it ties to this discussion.

Just wanted to revive this thread as I've found it to be personally enlightening and of much food for thought, especially with Craig's informed and helpful comments. I've been doing much thinking into presentation of magic, and do concur with some of Craig's thinking behind the need to bifucrate mentalism and magic, in that performing mentalism needs to be performed with such artistic integrity that requires an almost reverable fidelity in terms of conveying the appropriate sense of character. However, I suppose the other school of thought is the belief that adopting a mentalism flavour in presentation can still enrich The Close Up Guy's traditional magic.

I say this in the context of the self-awareness of recognising myself as a Wannabe. I've recently started to develop a respect for Derren Brown; not in a sense of his mentalism, but rather his less publically recognised abilities as a sleight of hand magician. I suppose the continuous name dropping of him by others did in fact spark curiousity to see what all the fuss was about. My homework into the infamous public persona of being a mysterious and intriguing force led me to the discovery of his earlier close up work, and the now out of print, Ebay gold dust that is Absolute Magic, as passed onto me by a magician friend. Whilst his later work is not necessarily something that appeals as strongly, his ability to invoke emotional wonder is so poignantly expressed in the following You Tube clip of him showing Zamiel's Rose:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvwlIGpFKuA

It is this rich melting pot of skilful yet understated technique hand in hand with a strong almost ethereal presentation that best illustrates the style of presentation I strive for. His book does state that it is important not to over egg the pudding with such effects for fear of creating a solemn palatte, but the quintessence of the book for me, half way through, is the need to convey seriousness and not tongue in cheek tomfoolery. As illustrated by the other link, it is the emotional hook that transcends the more earthy dynamics of sleight of hand technique, which I believe goes some way to exemplify how delving into a mentalist feel can potentially enhance. I appreciate that the above video is not mentalism per se, and could rather be interpreted as spin on a trick, but it is the presentational elements that represent the delicate balance that I believe to be the holy grail of close up magic.

I'll just sit over here...

One of the worst things about Derren Brown's writing style is the overuse of long words that not only add nothing to meaning (if indeed they don't hamper clear expression), but also convey a general sense of pretension.

Part-Timer wrote:One of the worst things about Derren Brown's writing style is the overuse of long words that not only add nothing to meaning (if indeed they don't hamper clear expression), but also convey a general sense of pretension.

You mean Derren thinks his sh** don't stink?