talkmagic.co.uk

We psychic people have no need of Randi's money because being psychic we sense he is an old fraud who has no intention of giving us any even if we pulled half a ton of ectoplasm out of his left ear.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush I am afraid.

now here's a funny thing...

i was thinking about this thread on the train home tonight, and i have a question...

if we are so sure of psychic ability not existing, and we are almost morally offended by the idea - how come...

sssh come closer...

how come, we base so many of our effects on the thing that we say doesn't exist in the first place?

I have a psychic chop cup routine. The spirits steal the ball and put it under the cup. Also my psychic silk vanish is amazing.

Interesting point though. All though saying we base the effect on it dosent mean we have subscribe to it. Its like reading a book with murders and the likes in. Dose this mean the author is in to murdering and the likes?

abraxus wrote:now here's a funny thing...

I was thinking about this thread on the train home tonight, and I have a question...

if we are so sure of psychic ability not existing, and we are almost morally offended by the idea - how come...

sssh come closer...

how come, we base so many of our effects on the thing that we say doesn't exist in the first place?

I think the reason why is that many people do believe in the paranormal in some way, whether they admit it or not. I know someone who claims she doesn't believe in ghosts but is too scared to watch Most Haunted!
When I asked her whether she truly didn't believe in the supernatural, she went on to admit that she does believe it but would rather convince herself it doesn't exist as she found it all scary

I used to believe in, or shall I rephrase that, used to want to believe in this kind of thing and if you want to believe in it you would convince yourself. The more you learn about magic and mentalism, the more sceptical you become towards this kind of thing and you are aware of the methods used such as cold reading, etc.

I have seen some mediums and tarot readers who aren't clued up to the methods used and truly believe they are gifted with some knd of power. Watching them in action, they have less hits than a solo Andrew Ridgely and are quite often completely off the mark.

I don't for one minute have a shut mind to psychic powers, ESP, etc, but nothing has conclusively convinced me of it's authenticity.

However, I tell the people I perform for that I truly believe in all this...

Markdini wrote:
Interesting point though. All though saying we base the effect on it dosent mean we have subscribe to it. Its like reading a book with murders and the likes in. Dose this mean the author is in to murdering and the likes?

My personal opinion is that having at least some belief in the supernatural helps me to convey my own sense of wonder to my specs. I feel that my job is to bring a small pinch of wonder back into people's lives - and if believing that there really were fairies at Cottingley, then so be it. I'm more than happy to oblige. Life can be rubbish enough without folk running around and p*ssing on everyone's bonfire just to show how clever they are. I want my kids to believe in Father Christmas for as long as they possibly can.

Markdini wrote:Interesting point though. All though saying we base the effect on it dosent mean we have subscribe to it. Its like reading a book with murders and the likes in. Dose this mean the author is in to murdering and the likes?

Is that quite the same? A better comparison would be a book that seems to glorify murderers. The purpose of most mentalism performances is to show amazing powers, and the benefits they could bring. If you merely do stuff anyone else can do, it's arguably not very exciting (see Bob Cassidy's views on the subject).

Most performers don't do a metal-bending routine, then say, "You know what, it's all just a trick, and I don't really believe in psychokinesis, and you're an idiot if you do."

I think what abraxus was getting out goes a little deeper than merely how a performance is framed; there's a subtle promotion of belief in psychic powers in many 'standard' approaches to mentalism.

The psychological/mind control performers don't do that, of course. While they are fibbing about what they do as much as the psychic ones, they aren't tacitly confirming anyone's belief in the supernatural.

I think it ties in with something Craig says quite a lot. With an actor, or a 'standard' magician, the members of the audience suspend their disbelief. With a psychic performer, they invest belief.

What is the need for us to be the mind control, the pyscological or the psychic performer. This goes mainly for mentalist. I never say I am doing this or that. I just do it. If they invest in to it then its there business. Let them fill in the blanks

yeah, but the blanks are usually:

tricks - game over...
skills learnt, or
the power of the mind...

if it's one thing, by definition, it can't be the "other"...because they are the opposite of each other..

an old school-er would say "i can read your thought..."
a new school-er would say "say the word in your mind..thank you, i saw your eyes flick up for a second there..."

and so on, there's a process involved for both, but at the same time, the framing is completely different, and yet - a good percentage of mental-effects would really only be achievable if you could somehow do something unusual with your mind...

if a new school-er gave out a pack of esp cards, and predicted the order, he could say "it's because i studied your persona, and that is the order i thought you would go for...plus i influenced you subtley too" then its great, interesting and entertaining...it's a learnt skill...

but if it were an old school-er, he would be predicting the order, because he could somehow read your thoughts or gain a sense of each card somehow...then it becomes something more esoteric and unusual..

im not trying to stir, or weaken anyone elses arguments, just pointing something out that i personally find an interesting concept...if you hate something so much, and want proof - don't perform stuff that has that slant..that goes for both sides naturally

abraxus wrote:how come, we base so many of our effects on the thing that we say doesn't exist in the first place?

Is that the "treaty that makes the madness work"?

You say tricks Mr Abraxus but isnt that what we do? Ok i know all about the concept on you should make it "real" and the likes. But has I told the beard If they think I am a psychic then i am if i am NLP and that jazz then i am.

of course it is 'dini..of course...but just going with the flow of this thread, it's just a concept i thought made it all quite spicy...

we all use psychology, we all use misdirection and god knows what else, but with our own labels and personal beliefs, i am starting to find it very interesting that some people who want proper proof (can't blame 'em) would also use a spoon bend...

and i would hope that if someone was a psychic, wouldnt need me to write anything down...for verification purposes or no, and if i was going to lie, they should know that too...

i just think to be so definate about things, on either side, can be limiting...and you should live and die by your own beliefs...which should also reflect in the character you play when you perform...however much of a step away from the real you it is...

Some one once said "if hollywood wanted to make a film about a magician they would use an actor. A magician would be a terriable actor"

This is a good point. When we perfor we should be a charactor. And most magicians are not good actors apart from Andy Nyman and a couple of others but they are actors first and magicians second. A magician is a magician first and foremost and actor second. I think when performing one should be the actor, rather then the magician.

Never mind the sceptics vs believers debate, abraxus is hitting us with the tough questions!

I think it is possible to leave open what one is doing. Some people are savvy and know we are just doing tricks. I think it's still possible to be entertaining, but it isn't as powerful as getting that investment of belief, whether in skills or psychic powers. It can still be a damn good show.

One problem with the psychological slant is that things like metal bending are effectively out. "I psychologically bent this fork."

Then again, as I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, a certain performer who claims to be a mind control expert did a blindfold car drive.

I suppose the best way to approach this is to take an extreme example and see what we think. We can work on from there.

Let's say that we have Mr X (good name for a mentalist, actually), who is a firm sceptic of the kind who doesn't even entertain the possibility of there being any kind of genuine psychic phenomena.

However, Mr X likes seeing people freak out when he bends spoons. "It gets such great reactions. One guy wet himself with fright!"

If Mr X has a 'mad-on' for people who claim to be 'genuinely' psychic, should he bend spoons?

My view is that, while it is arguably a tiny bit hypocritical of him to do so, he is ultimately a performer. I think he'd be better off doing stuff that was more in keeping with his beliefs, but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

Very true timer. After all we play a part (see what I done there). I think we have to seperate what we do as mentalist from our real beliefs. Play the part dont let it cloud you has a performer. And debate the morals on TM

I think the reason why is that many people do believe in the paranormal in some way, whether they admit it or not. I know someone who claims she doesn't believe in ghosts but is too scared to watch Most Haunted!

This is something that interestes me. When I was an 'agnostic' about the supernatural I would claim to not believe in ghosts, but be scared by supernatural programs/films. I think this is where you can find a split between the intellect and the emotions. I was emotional scared/believed in ghosts, but intellectually didn't believe. If I watched the same program in the light of day, I would have a giggle at it (why do 'ghosts' only come out at night?)

On to the main point, Whatever magic/mentalism we do, we are professing (usually) to be doing something that we don't believe in. There is a lie in there somewhere. So I dont think there is a problem. However, I dont agree with the idea of talking to a dead loved one, and so wouldn't claim to be doing that.

Having said that, these things are not completely black and white. Is there a difference say between claiming to be talking to someones cead husband, and just a random chanelling of a spirit for an effect.

It seems that there is a bit of a split between the 'i talk to the dead' camp and the 'fusion of magic, psychology...' camp. Isn't there a third possibility...you can read thoughts...telepathy...etc. I teach psychology, so I live in that camp predominently, because it fits in with who I am. Though this is not always in your face, and I leave it up to the people watching like dini said. It can fit in with who you are. Take Derren Brown's ootw living and dead test. That could be taken a number of different ways (despite the claimer). If someone asked whether I can contact the dead though, I would tel them no, without hesitation.