talkmagic.co.uk

Also remember that people today are far more cynical and skeptical than they were fifty years ago (especially here in the UK). Claim to be psychic, and most of the audience will accept it as a narrative device. They won't believe it, but they'll suspend disbelief for the duration of the show - if the show's a good one.

People are, however, more inclined to believe in psychological control or conditioning or whatever scientific spin you want to give your effects.

So you could argue that the purely psychological approach to mentalism is more dishonest than the ambiguous or psychic one.

All right then......

I tend to present my effects as a combination of heightened awareness through meditation and psychological reading/influence. To be honest I would like to present them as genuine inexplicable feats or psychic phenomena but I don't have the acting skills to be able to do that convincingly whereas I think I do have the acting ability to pretend I use the methods I claim to.

To my mind, the ethics of an action is determined by the intention behind it. For me to claim that I can tell what a person is thinking by reading micro signals is just as much of a lie as me claiming that I have psychic powers. It's just one that I happen to be more comfortable with. Maybe the important thing is not which deception one utilises, but why one is deceiving in the first place.

One final thing. Just because people don't believe in 'magic', whatever you take that to be, it doesn't mean it does not exist. The universe is a mysterious thing and human conciousness even more so. I would not like to make any rash claims about it. Of course, this is merely a subjective view, not objective fact. But my view is that one cannot measure conciousness, all that one can measure are the processes that arise out of it.

I should probably stop now.

Best wishes
Gary

Gary Dickson wrote:All right then......

I tend to present my effects as a combination of heightened awareness through meditation and psychological reading/influence. To be honest I would like to present them as genuine inexplicable feats or psychic phenomena but I don't have the acting skills to be able to do that convincingly whereas I think I do have the acting ability to pretend I use the methods I claim to.

To my mind, the ethics of an action is determined by the intention behind it. For me to claim that I can tell what a person is thinking by reading micro signals is just as much of a lie as me claiming that I have psychic powers. It's just one that I happen to be more comfortable with. Maybe the important thing is not which deception one utilises, but why one is deceiving in the first place.

One final thing. Just because people don't believe in 'magic', whatever you take that to be, it doesn't mean it does not exist. The universe is a mysterious thing and human conciousness even more so. I would not like to make any rash claims about it. Of course, this is merely a subjective view, not objective fact. But my view is that one cannot measure conciousness, all that one can measure are the processes that arise out of it.

I should probably stop now.

Best wishes
Gary

Nice post Gary.

I must say how refreshing it is to hear some of these articulate, well thought out posts. A couple of years ago on TM any mention of "psychic" would have been met with a barrage of posts toeing the more traditional magician line of "they're all scammers and con-men and psychic ability doesn't exist". Funny how that tide now is more towards an open mind philosophy, which is to be applauded.

Ben,

Why the need to tell the spectator what your doing at all? Why do you need to give an explanation? You're meant to be entertaining people not teaching them. People will make up their own minds on how something is done when and after they've seen it.

Asking someone to think of a number and then explaining that to find out the number you shall watch their eye access cues and adam's apple is one extreme. Another of course would be to tell them to think of a number and turn a piece of paper round and its there. That's a puzzle. No 'mind reading' has occured. You provide the spectator with the process. No shop assisstant scans your can of bakebeans at the checkout and explains that a series of magnetic strips on the can and the database are all linked to provide you with the amount of pennies to take out of your hard earned cash. You know it works and you've made your own mind up about it. Bad example maybe.

Heres another, I only started the ol' mentalism thing about 2 years ago. One of my closest friends i have known for much longer. When i started performing some stuff for him without me even having to give an explanation he had a full blown conversation with me about how I'm reading his cues and body language to determine his thought. He accepted that i could easily do that and was intrigued. At no point did i ever feel a need to tell him otherwise or provide another explanation. He was amazed and happy and thats all that matters - isn't it?

Yes, i want my work to be believable and undoubtably i take the psychological route in my performance. But at no point do i tell them that. Its in the performance itself, telling them to say the word over and over again and then asking to make sure they don't say it or MOVE their lips is enough for the spectator to realise in their own mind - 'oh i can see what he's doing, he's watching my lips'. They make the trick into what they want it to be. You don't have to.

You also have to remember that the Derren Brown is in the eye of the British public and therefore he is prone to all sorts of questions. He's confronted in so many interviews so he has to give an explanation for what he does, he is pressurized to do so. Yes, he chooses the psychological route, but only confirms it when asked.

No amount of explanation to a spectator will give your trick and more wow factor. It may determine the way a spectator looks at your work - is it a trick, is it not? But then again if you really are using psychological techniques your still just tricking the mind aren't you?

Kroots wrote:Why the need to tell the spectator what your doing at all? Why do you need to give an explanation? You're meant to be entertaining people not teaching them. People will make up their own minds on how something is done when and after they've seen it.

Spot on! No need to give yourself a label, the specs will do that for you regardless. Just do your utmost to ensure it's the kind of label you'd like!

Absolutely agree. When performing I don't make claims as to what I'm doing, I just do it. Generally the specs tell me what they think I'm doing and I behave in a way that confirms their belief.

If I am pressed I will give them an explanation that relies on meditation increasing one's awareness. I'm a Buddhist, so I'm able to give a technical, believable explanation that both fits my performing style and leaves room for movement into stranger territory.

Obviously not everyone is a Buddhist, so this approach won't work for all. But it works for me as it gives me a framework within which I can operate.

themagicwand: thanks for your kind words. I have noticed that people on this forum can be very rationalistic and scientifically orientated, which is fine I suppose, but I think that science and rationalism are limited (although useful) tools and that there is plenty of room for the irrational both within our performances and in our lives.

Best wishes
Gary

Interesting ideas. Thank you very much for your advice on this subject.

But what do you do if the spectator asks about it?
Thanks for the thoughts,

-Ben

Oh you do like to drag a topic on dont you (joking)

My persoanl opinion, and not one based on anything other than my own thoughts and beliefs.

* Blag it/Bluff it/Lie

Delete as appropriate.

You can often find an "excuse" or reason.
However i suppose the point is if they ask you, you need to ask yourself why they asked in the first place.
Maybe something was noticed, or just didnt seem right.
I know when i have watched magicians, the only ones i have asked how something was done was because it didnt seem right somehow. The best magic i have seen i dont want to know, i just enjoy it for what it is.

magicmindben wrote:
But what do you do if the spectator asks about it?

Spec: Are you psychic?
Me: Yes.

Easy.

every good lie should have a small element of the truth in it...

if you dont want to claim psychic powers, or NLP and body language stuff - good! it means you're not relying on other peoples premises for your effects...

what sort of person you are, should somehow help define what you do...

you do not necessarily have to vocalise your label, but indirectly suggest it in how and what you present...

as long as you are consistent...

Mandrake wrote:

Kroots wrote:Why the need to tell the spectator what your doing at all? Why do you need to give an explanation? You're meant to be entertaining people not teaching them. People will make up their own minds on how something is done when and after they've seen it.

Spot on! No need to give yourself a label, the specs will do that for you regardless. Just do your utmost to ensure it's the kind of label you'd like!

You have to introduce the trick with some reasoning...

-Ben

magicmindben wrote:
You have to introduce the trick with some reasoning...

-Ben

In the words of Evil Willow - "Bored now."

In the words of Evil Willow - "Bored now."

Brilliant

themagicwand wrote:

magicmindben wrote:
You have to introduce the trick with some reasoning...

-Ben

In the words of Evil Willow - "Bored now."

Okay... I'm digging out the Buffy DVD collection again.

Can't... help... myself...

See you in a month or two!

pcwells wrote:

themagicwand wrote:

magicmindben wrote:
You have to introduce the trick with some reasoning...

-Ben

In the words of Evil Willow - "Bored now."

Okay... I'm digging out the Buffy DVD collection again.

Can't... help... myself...

See you in a month or two!

"Villians," Season 6, episode 20 (if that helps).