talkmagic.co.uk

Could some one do a review on Darwin Ortiz's "Strong Magic" or show
me one because I'm getting it soon and I would like to see what people
think of it. I got recommended it by a hypnotist/close up magician who
came to my college so it should be good. I've just been looking for a review and I can't find one.

Wrong section...

(Note from Mods - thread now moved. Always check the Review Index before asking for a Review)

If you're getting it soon why does a review matter? Or are you "planning on getting it would you like a review? I don't own it but... I'm sure Lenoir owns it. In fact I think he had a thread on this not to long ago try searching.

I'm sure there are reviews of it already.

That said, to answer your question, it's excellent. The book gives many subtle, yet significant ideas, such as avoiding anti-climaxes, how to build up a climax, creating a persona, among other ideas. It's been a while since I read it, I should go over it again...

I also cannot find a review (and I thought I wrote one here). I agree with sleightlycrazy, it is an excellent book. If you are serious about making your magic better, you will not be disappointed. I would also recommend Designing Miracles, also by Darwin Ortiz.

It is indeed an excellent book. I agree with virtually everything in it except his advice on hecklers which basically consists of ignoring them and as a last resort saying, "This is what happens when cousins marry". There are far cleverer approaches than that especially the techniques that I use. But then of course I am MARK LEWIS and he isn't.

Another thing bothers me and it is also a terrible irritant in the Maximum Entertainment book by Ken Weber. I hate to see invidual magicians of note mentioned and criticised by name in order to put the author's point of view. I consider it bad manners and showing a lack of respect. And although the Weber book is hailed with great idolation I don't think it deserves it. There is a lot of stuff in that particular book which I think is plain bad advice and is actually wrong.

Not the Ortiz book though. It is a fantastic book. It is a great pity that Ortiz doesn't practice what he preaches though. I saw him perform Macdonald's Aces once to a lay person and I thought he was atrocious.
However the book is great apart from the advice on hecklers.

Do as he says not what he does. His preaching is great. His practicing isn't.

I will post a review for you mate during the next few days- what with christmas and boxing day, I won't be in much of a state to do much at all!! but WATCH THIS SPACE

I knew I posted a review here.

Cheers

mark lewis wrote:Not the Ortiz book though. It is a fantastic book. It is a great pity that Ortiz doesn't practice what he preaches though. I saw him perform Macdonald's Aces once to a lay person and I thought he was atrocious.

Do as he says not what he does. His preaching is great. His practicing isn't.

B0ll0cks.

And I say that with the greatest respect for your abilities as a performer for children and of mentalism and in pitching svengalis. But you have no credentials when it comes to constructing and selling a gambling act, while Darwin has made a successful career out of it.

You might not agree with the stylistic choice of another magician, but you cannot argue with SUCCESS. Don't confuse your personal taste with the painful reality.

For example, I find most mentalism to be excruciatingly tiresome, boring and obvious (with some excellent exceptions) but I would be dishonest if I was unable to admit the fact that that sort of thing is not boring to many people.

Dearie me. What perfectly dreadful language. Obviously a member of the British lower working classes. I can tell the chap is British because of British profanity used. Quite disgraceful. Do try to improve yourself my boy.

Now let me examine what you say. First I CAN argue with success. I am MARK LEWIS and can argue about anything. Furthermore it is perfectly obvious that my word is gospel in all matters of this kind.

First there is absolutely no evidence of the Ortiz "success" you mention. And even if there were I am discussing the chap's talent rather than the size of his bank account. It is true that I have no credentials in matters to do with gambling and depravity of that kind but the book in question does not have anything to do with gambling anyway. I am not an expert in astronomy but Darwin's book doesn't mention astronomy either. So don't talk rot-there's a good chap.

However the book discusses presentation of close up magic and I certainly have credentials where this is concerned. I can humbly claim to be one of the greatest close up card magicians of all time so that alone qualifies me to remark on this book. Actually I am the greatest of all time but I prefer to say "one of the greatest" in case you think me immodest.

I can assure you that Darwin Ortiz has written a brilliant book. I can also assure you he needs to read it himself. His patter is far too long winded. His pace is far too slow. His movements are far too jerky and suspicious. He is not an entertainer of the calibre of MARK LEWIS. He knows how to manipulate the cards-he does not know how to manipulate the people.

I do agree however that mentalism is excruciatingly boring and I can't watch it unless I am doing it myself. I thank God that Darwin isn't a mentalist otherwise he would be slow and long winded that by the end of the trick the audience would have forgotten what the beginning was.

I have indeed heard that he gets standing ovations from college audiences doing so called gambling demonstrations. However it should be remembered that these audiences consist of rather silly young people who go "wow" when watching the ball and vase trick. Moreover they are American young people who also think that David Copperfield can actually fly and that Criss Angel is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

These audiences are not British educated and can hardly be described as discerning.

However as I stated the book is rather good and should be studied carefully. I am merely saying that Darwin needs to work on his presentation a trifle. He can start by pruning his patter and quickening his pace.


Furthermore I hope that scoundrel Kaufmann pays him what he owes him.
Dreadful shame writing a good book when the publisher not only doesn't pay him but trashes the book as well.

mark lewis wrote:Dearie me. What perfectly dreadful language. Obviously a member of the British lower working classes. I can tell the chap is British because of British profanity used. Quite disgraceful. Do try to improve yourself my boy.

Now let me examine what you say. First I CAN argue with success. I am MARK LEWIS and can argue about anything. Furthermore it is perfectly obvious that my word is gospel in all matters of this kind.

First there is absolutely no evidence of the Ortiz "success" you mention. And even if there were I am discussing the chap's talent rather than the size of his bank account. It is true that I have no credentials in matters to do with gambling and depravity of that kind but the book in question does not have anything to do with gambling anyway. I am not an expert in astronomy but Darwin's book doesn't mention astronomy either. So don't talk rot-there's a good chap.

However the book discusses presentation of close up magic and I certainly have credentials where this is concerned. I can humbly claim to be one of the greatest close up card magicians of all time so that alone qualifies me to remark on this book. Actually I am the greatest of all time but I prefer to say "one of the greatest" in case you think me immodest.

I can assure you that Darwin Ortiz has written a brilliant book. I can also assure you he needs to read it himself. His patter is far too long winded. His pace is far too slow. His movements are far too jerky and suspicious. He is not an entertainer of the calibre of MARK LEWIS. He knows how to manipulate the cards-he does not know how to manipulate the people.

I do agree however that mentalism is excruciatingly boring and I can't watch it unless I am doing it myself. I thank God that Darwin isn't a mentalist otherwise he would be slow and long winded that by the end of the trick the audience would have forgotten what the beginning was.

I have indeed heard that he gets standing ovations from college audiences doing so called gambling demonstrations. However it should be remembered that these audiences consist of rather silly young people who go "wow" when watching the ball and vase trick. Moreover they are American young people who also think that David Copperfield can actually fly and that Criss Angel is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

These audiences are not British educated and can hardly be described as discerning.

However as I stated the book is rather good and should be studied carefully. I am merely saying that Darwin needs to work on his presentation a trifle. He can start by pruning his patter and quickening his pace.

I enjoyed your post and agreed with some elements. You certainly are argumentative! Tick.

As an aside, your internet character is marvellous - what a shame you use such a different character when working for the laity. I think you'd be far more entertaining. I agree with you that I wouldn't want to see Darwin doing any mentalism. But that's only because I don't want to see anybody do mentalism. Even you, as I wouldn't want you to feel humiliated and inadequate.

Furthermore I hope that scoundrel Kaufmann pays him what he owes him.
Dreadful shame writing a good book when the publisher not only doesn't pay him but trashes the book as well.

I completely agree. I think that it is, however, unlikely. It would be a miracle. Before that happens, we will see the Read Sea part again, the arrival of the 12th imam and Mark Lewis reinstated as a member of the Genii forum.

Kaufmann likes me more than he pretends. But that is another story for another time.

Actually I don't do much mentalism even though it mentions that I do on my website. I am a hypnotist and magician more than anything else. I am also a psychic rather than a mentalist. Not quite the same thing.

To be frank the only mentalists I like are either dead or nearly dead. And I can count them on the fingers of one hand.

mark lewis wrote:Kaufmann likes me more than he pretends. But that is another story for another time.

Actually I don't do much mentalism even though it mentions that I do on my website. I am a hypnotist and magician more than anything else. I am also a psychic rather than a mentalist. Not quite the same thing.

To be frank the only mentalists I like are either dead or nearly dead. And I can count them on the fingers of one hand.

I agree 100% with this post.

He also wants to be my friend, but doesn't know it. One day I will visit Canada and buy you a beer. We can boast about our forum banning scars and heap derision on mentalists we have endured.

REVIEW HERE

and also HERE

Beer? Certainly not. I am a man of the cloth and do not indulge in the devil's buttermilk.