talkmagic.co.uk

the great suprendo wrote:what im saying is ..where would the mentalist be who relied on this if it failed mid act ...just broke ...hed be totally cabaged ... much better relying on sleight of hand and diversion than a machine.... I guess when the chips are down thats when you see a real entertainer

Yeah and like I mentioned above, that's where the term 'naked mentalism' seems to come from.

Now, I'm not a mentalist but I can understand this form a cardie's point of view; I would quite happily walk into a room completely naked, deck firmly in hand, and be confident to perform without any gimmicks or devices concealed about my personage (and you'd be quite welcome to check).
These type of skills are typically harder to acquire, but the payoffs are obvious.

EDIT: Actually, the thought of Geoffrey Durham checking my body orifices does not appeal. I take it back.
Mind you, imagine him crawling towards you, naked, across a glass table. With a rose between his teeth.
Go on. imagine it.
Squeak squeak.

But surely it's just a tool, no different from using a stooge, i********n p*d or any of the other 101 tools or underhanded methods that mentalists are using all the time. Ok psychological mentalism is out there but I'd have thought that 90% of mentalist effects rely on some tool or another.

"for once the veil is lifted it's hard to look at this amazing art form with the same eyes... "

i dunno i enjoy reading and studying mentalism approaches and its never spoilt it for me knowing about them before , this just escalates it to a new level though i mean why read a hundred books when you can achive the same effect for £1000 ... , its like all the stuff i previously read about is basically redundant ..
people figuring stuff out over mnths or even years ..wiped out in a few seconds by technology doesnt seem right

the great suprendo wrote:"I've had days where I've performed several Naked effects in a row and got nothing more than unspectacular near misses. But the people I've performed for have still applauded at the end because they can see a pattern forming showing a deeper ability."

are you sure they werent just being nice ?

You're obviously trying to get some kind of reaction. Don't bother. It's too obvious.

its called humour tom its supposed to be part of patter i think

oh come on boys, lets not get into another arguement

me kisses tomo and says sorry

Let's be honest, all magic and Mentalism is cheating of one kind or another but the intention and purpose is what saves it from being a bad way of cheating. Electronics have recently made their way into magic but so did other scientific utilities such as electricity and magnetism many years ago. Simple effects costing absolutely nothing can be just as entertaining and baffling as the mega huge stage effects. Old time things like Pepper's Ghost cost a fortune to make and stage yet a basic torn and restored of a cigarette paper can be just as much fun.

The only real reason that I can see that you are upset by this, suprendo, is that you've not been able to come up with a way to steal it yet.

Mike.

I will stick my hand up here and say that I am one of those mentalists who goes on stage wired up with certain items of electronic gadgetry although I do not use an assistant in the wings.

I use Equinox, I love Equinox, I do a 15 minute routine with Equinox. Those who know Equinox will know there are other, much cheaper methods of obtaining the same information - but Equinox allows me to do it hands off.

Thing is, when I am performing the routine, I do actually try to do what I say I am doing, I look for tell tale signs, "tells" as the poker boys call them, I look for body language clues and the way they speak - if I can pick up on them I can point them out to the audience so diverting the fact that I already have the information needed. I will go as far as to say that there have been several occasions I could have done the routine "naked" - but having Equinox has allowed me the freedom to be ultra confident.

You say using a gimmick that allows an assistant to communicate directly with the performer is cheating - I say it is just another method.

Andy Nyman used a spectator to signal him during one routine.
I am quite sure Debbie McGee has done lots of training and practice when assisting Paul Daniels.

It is the performer that creates the magic; gimmicks and props are just tools of the job.

There are people here who can do better magic with a normal set of cards than I could do with any gaffed deck.

Any fool can buy expensive props but what happens when you are asked to do something impromptu? Or your electronic gadget breaks down?
People that can perform anywhere, anytime are the most believable.
Magicians such as David Copperfield have a grounding in SOH and they perform the bigger illusions as they are able to present them correctly.

I am sensing that there is a deliberate wind-up going on here somewhere though...

im not trying to wind anyone up deliberately[love the avatar by the way] , i genuinely feel as this becomes more and more commonplace more and more people will not learn traditional methods and eventually these older methods will be lost for all time thats all .
totally mental . i like the use of misdirection whilst using these gimmicks though , nice idea to try to explain to people how you know , that actually not only diverts them but gives them a plausible explanation for what you accomplish

Lady of Mystery and Mandrake both made good points (although so did many others, and Mike's comment got a laugh from me).

It seems like a very odd reaction to me. It is a bit like the way a child might react to the news that there's no Easter Bunny. Read all about it: Magician cheats shocka!!!

A certain extremely well-known performer used an electronic device in one of his stage shows. It went wrong one evening. I'm told he had to try to bluff his way through the effect.

Yes, other methods can go wrong too, but some are riskier than others.

In another show, I noticed he'd dropped the whizzy method and gone back to something a bit more basic.

Ted Lesley sells electronic items in his magic shop, but I believe he doesn't use them himself, as the risk is too great. Motorised gizmos might be different, though.

Also, you should really have at least two of each device (if you're a professional), and even that leaves you exposed if the thing breaks mid-performance.

Do you lose respect for illusionists who perform with those lovely boxes that cost thousands of pounds each? I personally have some qualms with exactly how strong some of those effects are, precisely because of the obvious props, but the real magic is in the performance, not the trick.

Yes, a very expensive device can allow you to work some amazing effects. They are:

Expensive (obviously).
Delicate.
Potentially going to stop working/run out on you, even if looked after.
Unlikely to be used by 90% of performers and unlikely to be used to any great extent by the others (if they have any sense).

Tomo wrote:I've had days where I've performed several Naked effects in a row and got nothing more than unspectacular near misses. But the people I've performed for have still applauded at the end because they can see a pattern forming showing a deeper ability.

Seriously mate, froget all this UFO2 nonsense. Consult your vast purloined library and look up the word "out".

What Tomo said. See just because there are a couple of Gadgets out there it dosent mean you got to base a show on them. I use Tomo's stuff, bits of paper and someother gadgets and gizmos. If they go wrong then they do.

Its all tools to create an illusion. Have you lost respect for every magician that uses a tt? I use one in mentalism

There are clean methods and dirty methods in mentalism just like magic. It be silly to base everything on them.

I really think you should read up more.

ahh mike now u mention im not able to steal it ur probably slightly incorrect , i have studied electronics , and robotics is amongst my hobbies , i should imagine a store like www.maplins.co.uk could supply 90% of the parts required to bounce a few signals round on a radio frequency , i would imagine the "electronic dice" are constructed using some kind of mercury switch although i could be wrong , and a table that senses what zone objects are put in is a simple sensor ..a touchpad or infra red or sonar sensor would probably do the job