talkmagic.co.uk

They might be different games but they are still at the same event. The psychic may well be asked to stay on but the magician will be bade goodnight.

I am equally skilled at both arts so I know.

Now here is a great scenario which I have offered several times. You do BOTH. Sometimes I am even able to offer a short cabaret act as well as close up magic combined with psychic reading.

This is what you do. You do walk around close up magic for an hour or so.
Then you do a 20 minute cabaret act and announce from the stage that shortly you will be in a quiet corner and anyone that wants a reading can come over and have one for free. A line will form and you will be busy for the rest of the evening. No matter how brilliant your close up magic and cabaret is the psychic readings will be the hit of the evening if you are any good at all. And sometimes you don't even have to be good. The concept of fortune telling is so strong that you will get away with it anyway.

If doing a cabaret act isn't appropriate or suitable simply tell the people you are doing close up magic to that later you will be reading palms. The interest will amaze you.

Try this concept and see. If there are a bunch of close up magicians vying for the job you will be the one that gets it just because you have this extra skill.

Craig, magicwand and Mr Lewis, I take your point. But one way I'd look at it is that if the general public tend to confuse close-up magic with mentalism, isn't that because so many close-up magicians include mentalism in their act?

When I perform OOTW I tell people it's a psychological mind-connecty-thingy (not in those words) and they will be able to seperate the cards into their colours, and I also have an incredibly simple concept using the glide that I dress up as a mentalism effect by "sending" them a number - so it's understandable people blur the lines between the two arts.

Both arts borrow incestuously from each other: mentalism uses magical concepts to acheive seemingly psychic results, and close-up magic uses the ruse of pretending to have a psychic edge to make the presentation of an effect more powerful.

I don't think that the average person does see the difference at all between the various types of magic\mentalism. They just don't see a difference between close-up magic, caberet, children's magic, mentalism etc. To them it's all just magic and the person doing it's a magician.

I can perform quite a deep demonstration of muscle reading and still have someone come up to me afterwards and say 'would you like to perform at my 7 year olds birthday?'

To them, you're just a magician.

I think David Blane and a number of other television magicians have extended the publics notion of magic to include mental magic.

David Blaine did a lot of strong mentalism in his magic shows.

As 'magicians' aren't we suppose to blur the edges, cross the boundary lines and generally do things which can't or shouldn't be possible?

If so we can mix magic and mentalism even though the audience won't know or care what label we put on it in private. It's equally valid to do 'only' magic or 'only' mentalism if that's what your choice happens to be. No matter what you do, just do it to the very best of your ability and let the specs decide what to call it!

As 'magicians' aren't we suppose to blur the edges, cross the boundary lines and generally do things which can't or shouldn't be possible?

Indeed. If you perform efficiantly, surely the spectator shouldn't know whether its sleight of hand or just pure trickery?

Wild Card wrote:the spectator shouldn't know whether its sleight of hand or just pure trickery?

or in my case, sheer luck !

i, amongst a few had the pleasure of david berglas give us a jolly good talking to the other month, he did remind us, as did marc paul that whether we're magicians or mentalists we are supposed to be able to do things that everyone simply can't...in some ways, learnt skills weakens some, and only some presentations...

you have to re-capture the mystery somewhat...

to be considered unique, dont forget mr berglas wasnt "just" a mentalist or magician - he is still the man of mystery...he can do anything...a lightining quick mind, a hypnotist, a pick pocket all those things and far far more...

tha's why it annoys me a little with the whole NLP thing with Derren, and the flurry of people who suddenly got into it to be bitterly dissapointed - if you look at his skill set its multi-faceted - he had a dove act at one point, cards, close up, stage hypnosis, then psychologically based mentalism...

his disclaimer is perfect, just not in the percentages people are lead to believe...that's part of the genius...and in my mind anyway, if you mix berglas, annemann and canasta together - you get derren...

http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_23845.aspx

This link was posted on the magic cafe, and I thought it was relevant to this thread.

i think that article actually just proves that:

there are sick and twisted and self-delusional people in all walks of life...

but, it also shows how stupid people employed to be logical and sensible can be...

at the same time, if i were to provide an article about an alcoholic magician who ran someone over and killed them...does that mean we should be wary of all drunken magicians, even if they don't drive?

i have enjoyed playing devil's advocate during all this...

at the same time, if i were to provide an article about an alcoholic magician who ran someone over and killed them...does that mean we should be wary of all drunken magicians, even if they don't drive?

Are you talking about anyone you know...maybe...perhaps?
(The drunk magician bit...not the running someone over bit!)

Fair point, but a drunken magician is not giving advice or making claims/allegations based on the voices in their head. Anyone can be a drunk driver, only psychics give out advice/make allegations based on a pack of card/pile of pebbles/voices in their head. A psychic is playing with peoples decisions and ultimately with their lives. A magician is there to entertain. That is basically the dividing line between magicians/mentalists and psychics. One groups aim to entertain, the other aim to change peoples lives and dish out advice that they are in no position to give (It may sometimes be good, but it can also be bad. I would argue a best mate would be able to give better advice as they know the ins and outs of their life better). If a doctor (who qualified after meeting strict qualifying criteria), gave out dodgy advice, they would be struck off. A psychic (who just has a feeling that they are) can dish out all the c*** (not the best) they want with no consequence.

That happened in my area. I would love to know who the psychic was. I am bound to know him or her.
No. It wasn't me.

Some of the people in the business are absolutely dreadful. You can ruin people's lives with this stuff. I always think that a psychic is walking an ethical tightrope and must be careful not to fall off. With a lot of these people soothsaying is more profitable than truthsaying and half of them are incompetent and plain don't know what they are doing.

I never see stuff like this as a psychic and I am not sure anyone really can. Once you start to give out names and initials you are working on very sticky territory.

As for David Berglas I have cast shame upon his very name by revealing that he once spent an evening teaching me magic. It is all here on the genii forum where my very name is banned unless it is combined in the same sentence as the most holy and worthy David Ben.

David is publishing my book. He has published volumes about Stewart James, Herb Zarrow and Dai Vernon. I am amused to be added to the list. Poor Kaufmann seem to think that David has taken leave of his senses.
http://www.geniimagazine.com/forums/ubb ... Post168255

AndyRegs wrote:Are you talking about anyone you know...maybe...perhaps?
(The drunk magician bit...not the running someone over bit!)

i've only run 325 people over - i dunno what all the fuss is about..

i know what you mean mate, but i just meant that because a small amount of "whoevers" do bad things, doesnt mean therefore that all do...i know thats not what you were saying...but maybe indirectly suggesting..

look at the amount of bent judges that have been nicked over the years...

actually, bad example!

i must admit, mr lewis does impress that on his dvds of the tarot and palmistry about being moral and ethically proper...so for those that think he's just a wicked mischevious man...well, he is...but deep down he does actually care...

though he may not like to admit it...

i know what you mean mate, but i just meant that because a small amount of "whoevers" do bad things, doesnt mean therefore that all do...i know thats not what you were saying...but maybe indirectly suggesting..

I know what you are saying, and it is a fair point. I don't believe that all psychic are out to harm people either. THey probably think they are helping. I would ask why people portray themselves as psychics though. I wonder whether it is a power thing? Granted a lot of people get into magic as kids as it is something they can do that others cant, but as a psychic you take that one step (any many more) further. As magicians become serious about what they do, they want to entertain. What makes someone take that extra step? Why are they not happy just entertaining people?

A lot of them portray themselves as psychics because they think they are psychic.

Do you think all those 'charismatic (sic) preachers' are phonies who don't believe that the power of God is flowing through them?

Obviously, some are deliberate fakes (the guy caught with the Electric Touch being one), but I think many of them regard themselves as having an important gift.