talkmagic.co.uk

Hey well said abraxus!

I'm not sure if magicians doing mentalism type effects is really harming anyone. Let's take a 'psychic' as atrocious as the 'baby pshychic' (Derek Ogilvie). Nobody seems to connect him to magicians or 'tricks' do they.

Derren Brown, I think, has achived the perfect combination. Intelligent people truely believe what he does, they do not even question his explantion. With a person who proffesses to be psychic, they open themselves to skepticism, and so to the idea that it must have been a trick.

I think belief is the main factor. As long as the audience believes that what they have seen is real then mentalism is safe. It does not matter what context the performer puts the effect in.

well said again abraxus

I do relate to craig browning's displeasure in some ways though.
Far to many times do I seem to find inapropriate triks mixed together in some sort of mish mash. I am a young (cough) magician and have seen myself falling into this trap as I look to find killer trick after killer trick instead or tailoring the tricks I buy to my style.
A routine involving cold reading should in my opinion only include mentalisticly PRESENTED tricks, ie an effort for the whole routine and magicians character to fit with the style.
If his next $ comes from a kids show then fine, turning up in a clowns outfit and drinking milk through your head half an hour later is no problem.

Derren brown is an exception. He is a master of being a magician who everyone is not to sure about 'he must have some sort of powers' which is a credit to him. He lives on that indefinable edge of realism. But this style is his own and I would suggest very difficult to acheive.

Even on tv with these magic clip shows I see the different performers mixing the style of trick they do. In my very very humble opinion ( as all these guys who make it to tv are always going to be far better than me) I think they are wrong, present mr x as a clown, mr y as a card sharp and mr z and only mr z as the mentalist. They are falling into the one killer trick after another trap, but they have other magicians in the show to cover for the tricks thet don't fit in with their style.
I am not a mentalist. But I respect the opinion of people who whould like to keep this side of magic just a little more removed from main stream than it is and wish to support them in doing so.

yeah, dont get me wrong, for me it's all about the context...

that's why i said about that book Geist...it really helps with that...

And considering the history of playing cards, there's plenty of "reasons" as to why you would use them...

I agree with some of the sentiments in this discussion - mainly that sometimes it's difficult to box things, especially when one moves closer to the bizarre side of things.
The problem I have, however, is that most of the people who say magic and mentalist can be mixed are magicians - who may know a couple of 'mentalism' effects, but have never really seriously studied mentalism.
The difference between the two arts isn't in the effects - it's in the underlying premise. A study of Bob Cassidy, Corinda or Anneman etc. makes this very clear.

but at the same time, that's someone elses choice, however passionately someone feels about something, ultimately - whatever path someone want to tred is up to them...

and especially to find out for themselves what works and what doesnt..and usually only by doing will they find that out...plus, the more you tell people to not do something, the more they are likely to do so (so don't think of a white rabbit)

If i want to include some effects that use cards, then i will (and i do)...tarot cards begat playing cards, tarot readings can and have been done using playing cards - they can be something you play games with, or they can a group of symbols and colours that can tell a story, that can represent ideas and even people if you wish...

like a good salad, its all in the dressing! thats a particularly poor analogy but i've not had any coffee yet...

basically, if its good enough for corinda, knepper, annemann and brown, its good enough for me...each to their own afterall, makes life far spicier...

anyway taneous - when are you in London next? i've got some great card tricks to show you!

abraxus wrote:If i want to include some effects that use cards, then i will (and i do)...tarot cards begat playing cards, tarot readings can and have been done using playing cards - they can be something you play games with, or they can a group of symbols and colours that can tell a story, that can represent ideas and even people if you wish...

like a good salad, its all in the dressing! thats a particularly poor analogy but i've not had any coffee yet...

basically, if its good enough for corinda, knepper, annemann and brown, its good enough for me...each to their own afterall, makes life far spicier...

anyway taneous - when are you in London next? i've got some great card tricks to show you!

Hey - I do a coin trick as a 'mentalism' effect (inspired by one of Kenton Knepper's articles) - it's a demonstration of how we perceive reality and serves as a good introduction for what is to follow. Actually - the last half of the routine there really is no coin, but they still remember seeing it .

Not sure when I'll be in London next. hmm - card tricks. The fascinating thing for me isn't so much watching card tricks - but how one can spend so much time and money - coming up with and learning so many different methods to do the same thing

hehe i was only kidding with the card "tricks"...though houdini's hand by Lewis Jones is spectacular...

That's what i mean though, its how its served up and used isnt it...a coin vanish by any other name...blah blah blah...

Kenton's latest releases are 3 card effects...and yes, i will be buying one or two of them....but i doubt if they're "the same old thing">..

aah semantic antics...what fun...

centre tear, impression device, billet switch, hermann pass, injog and break, double undercut...

all sides of the same coin, that's not even there...

I think it's worth re-stating that the average man & woman in the street does not know (nor care) the difference between magic, mentalism, and psychic readings. How many times have you been asked if you can predict the lottery numbers when you've been working or demonstrating magic? All the time I bet. That's because "normal" people have no problem believing that someone who can make a coin disappear or an Ace continually jump to the top of a deck of cards should also posses psychic skills.

That's why skipping from "serious but not sombre" magic to mentalism and back again is no problem - as long as you're reasonably good at it and can keep your audience on-board.

On the subject of cold reading, I'm currently addicted to 6th Sense with Colin Fry on Living TV (a bit like Crossing Over with John Edwards to our American cousins). Watching him work an audience is great, and seeing him go through the standard cold reading motions is a pleasure to behold. To be honest he's not fantastic at cold reading - he scores one or two lucky hits but the rest is bog standard & TV editing - but it's his ability to hold the audience in a state of willing disbelief that makes him good at what he does. Let's be honest, if he really was talking to the dead, they haven't really got a lot to say have they? "Time to move on, put my photo in a frame, I'm with our Dad now," etc. You'd think they'd have something more prolific to say wouldn't you? Them being dead and all.