talkmagic.co.uk

What I don't understand is why many people regard Gellar as scum but still absolutely love Kreskin.

Aren't they both playing the same game?

Of course Gellar won't condemn parasites like Browne. To call her a fake would be seen by many as a pot calling the kettle 'grimy bottom'. And the last thing Gellar wants to do is side with Randi or be seen as playing his kind of game.

Besides, people like Browne have more than enough critics already.

What came through here for me was the fact that Gellar himself is the illusion. He is the act. If he came out and claimed to 'simulate' the effects he creates, they would be quickly forgotten and he would be just another entertainer.

Uri Gellar became the sensation that he is by being Uri Gellar. Like him or hate him, people talk about him. And decades after he first entered the public eye, people still know who he is, talk about him, and ask each other whether he's genuine or fake.

That's good going.

As far as I'm aware, though, he's never sold miracle prayer powder or other pricey nicknacks in the same way as Evangelical faith healers. He's never given people investment advice from deceased loved ones, and he's never told people how to vote.

He has, however, become a genuine mainstream sensation purely by leaving the question hanging - not 'how did he do it', but 'did he do it'.

And in the process, he's made the mentalism market much more mainstream and accessible for the rest of us. You need to explain to a client what mentalism is all about - Derren Brown is one name you could throw out there. The other is Uri Gellar.

Just my tuppence-worth...

Not only Kreskin but also Dunninger. Dunninger claimed to have genuine mind-reading abilities. Yet no-one (that I'm aware) in the magical community knocks him.

Perhaps in 50 years the magical community will be nodding sagely at the work of Geller while tut-tutting at some new hot-shot who stops watches with the power of his mind but doesn't own up to it being a trick - the charlatan.

I do seem to remember him saying he was willing the ball to move when Gary Mcallister struck a penalty for scotland...............the spoon bending watch fiddling sonofa...........nah that a side hes obviously great, people like derek "i can only chanel scouse ghosts" akorrah (sorry spelling) and sylvia browne are totally going to hell. Wheras i suspect uri will be greated in heaven by saint pete with a broken watch.

ha i just read that..........uri is brilliant. I love the its amazing how you guys bend spoons bit LMAO

I would have liked to be there, but could not get away for the weekend.
Peculiarly though, I sent an e-mail to Noel Britten on August 16th, in the guessing game: Who will be the mystery guest at International Magic Convention 2008. Multiple guesses were allowed and I sent 7 suggestions. Suggestion number 5 was Uri Geller Yey!

PcWells-He has sold a book which said that you could develop "phsycic" powers if you practiced. It came with a ring, some crystal, and something else.

Honestly I have mixed feelings about Uri.

(All of the following is assuming he is a fraud) I believe he has the right to perform and say he is phsycic and give people hope that they too can become phsycic. I believe as long as he has a positive influence (which he does) those who want to believe can believe him as long as they know that the same stunts can be performed by trickery. People can critize him as much they want. Although it is not going to get them anywhere.

On the other hand I do believe it sucks when given false hope. All of us have been given false hope ex. A friend didn't fufill his promise.

Agreed, but there's a difference between false hope and personal empowerment.

Yes, it's very unlikely that Gellar is going to teach people to be psychic. But if part of the deal is that they feel more in control of their own loves and feel that they have the wherewithall to steer their own vessel, then the underlying BS is justifed in my opinion.

Bet I get flamed for that comment!!

I'm a little surprised at the easy ride Gellar seems to be getting. Having read the excerpts from the interview, my take is that he is tailoring his message to suit the audience - in this case magicians. If I had never heard of him and read the comments posted here, I'd assume he was a gifted magician with a controversial, 'cheeky' (as he puts it) presentational style. That really isn't the case.

It was suggested in another post that the public "kind of believe in Gellar but are not sure about Derren Brown". That demonstrates what an exceptional performer Brown is as he is absolutely unequivocal in stating that he does not possess any powers. Gellar is equally unequivocal in claiming that he does indeed have a paranormal gift. Unequivocal that is until he sits in a room full of magicians, accepting a magic award. At this point we plunge headfirst into a large, handily situated grey area.

His reasoning for not giving a straight answer "I have to protect the performers in my show, I owe it to them" is wonderfully selfless. He also reveals that he was first drawn to the business of deception for personal gain because "I wanted to buy my mother a TV". Admirable.

I imagine he has squirreled away enough now for a flat screen plasma yet he just keeps on going. This leaves me with mixed feelings. On the one hand I genuinely think he is bloody good at what he does, he is certainly charismatic and part of me has a sneaking admiration for his ability to turn himself into a worldwide phenomenon. However when I read things like "I believe he has the right to perform and say he is phsycic and give people hope that they too can become phsycic" I begin to feel a bit uneasy (no offense intended goodissmyname).

Gellar has looked the world square in the eye, put his hand on his heart and lied. He hasn't done it to empower anybody or to give hope or be a blazing beacon of loveliness generally. He's done it to increase his own wealth and fame and to buy electrical appliances for close relatives.

My own view towards Gellar has been fairly ambivalent in that his grim determination to stick to his story in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary is faintly amusing. However if his self-aggrandising does genuinely have an effect on some people to the extent that it gives them the feeling of being "more in control of their lives etc." then that's taking the joke a bit far as John Sargeant might say.

Basing your self-esteem and hope for the future on a hackneyed fairytale is a bit dangerous in my view. It doesn't provide a particularly stable foundation.

Having said all that, I'm not a frothing at the mouth, online rantastic type and as long as he stays out of my cutlery drawer I have nothing particularly against Uri. Just felt this eulogy to his genius could do with a bit of balance.

Without wanting to get into any silly arguments, I would just ask this: why is it okay for Derren Brown to look the TV camera square in the eye and say without blinking "I did it all with a nlp, hypnosis, and suggestion" but it is wrong for Uri Geller to say "I have some kind of psychic gift"?

themagicwand wrote:Without wanting to get into any silly arguments, I would just ask this: why is it okay for Derren Brown to look the TV camera square in the eye and say without blinking "I did it all with a nlp, hypnosis, and suggestion" but it is wrong for Uri Geller to say "I have some kind of psychic gift"?

Ah, now this is interesting for another reason entirely. Has Brown ever actually said this? I've been trying to find a bit of film of him saying it for a piece I've had on the back burner for Visions for a while, but all I can find is the usual disclaimer.

Tomo wrote:

themagicwand wrote:Without wanting to get into any silly arguments, I would just ask this: why is it okay for Derren Brown to look the TV camera square in the eye and say without blinking "I did it all with a nlp, hypnosis, and suggestion" but it is wrong for Uri Geller to say "I have some kind of psychic gift"?

Ah, now this is interesting for another reason entirely. Has Brown ever actually said this? I've been trying to find a bit of film of him saying it for a piece I've had on the back burner for Visions for a while, but all I can find is the usual disclaimer.

He hasn't ever used the term NLP to explain his doings. He only ever has his usual magic, psychology, sugg......e.t.c

Which technically, he is being honest is he not?

Blapsing_Beard wrote:He hasn't ever used the term NLP to explain his doings. He only ever has his usual magic, psychology, sugg......e.t.c

Which technically, he is being honest is he not?

He's being honest by stating the ingredients, but doesn't state the ratio of each.

Yep I agree absolutely, no reason for silly arguments, it's just a pretty interesting topic and good to hear different views.

Famously, Derren emphasises at the beginning of every show that the effects are created with a combination of "magic, suggestion, psychology, misdirection and showmanship". This makes things crystal clear, however as you rightly suggest, during the course of the show he will very often lead his audience up the nlp garden path.

I believe this is fundamentally different to claiming paranormal powers a la Gellar. Derren himself is on record as saying nlp is largely nonsense so I think it's safe to assume it doesn't play a large part. However the majority of the public believe it's at the heart of what he does. So is he misleading the public in the same way that Gellar does? I would say not.

To begin with, nlp, hypnosis and suggestion are not paranormal. Exactly how effective these things are is really for another discussion. He is leading the audience away from the real secret behind the effect but importantly he is directing them towards a false method that makes no God-like claims for himself. We all know it is possible to read body language, arms crossed = defensive etc. It is possible to influence people in all sorts of subtle suggestive ways. Hypnosis does exist even if it is simply the ability to make people more relaxed through repetition etc. In other words although Derren may claim he uses these methods much more than he actually does (incidentally I don't think he has ever claimed "I did it ALL with a nlp, hypnosis, and suggestion") I would suggest this is no different from another magician claiming that the large, gaudily painted box is definitely empty before producing a shaken, slightly teary eyed girl and a white tiger. The claims in both cases are false but are necessary for there to be entertainment and magic.

Gellar on the other hand does say "I have some kind of psychic gift". As has been pointed out already, he has a very limited repertoire of effects and without this false claim, we would never have heard of him.

Again, whether some sort of psychic ability is possible somewhere in someone is a different question. What we do know is that it has never been proven despite many years of study. I heartily hope it does exist but with people like Gellar muddying the waters it just makes it that much more difficult to find out.

Fort's answers express my opinions better than I ever could. I'll just add that paranormal stuff aside, his tendency to sue everything in sight also sours my opinion of him.

But in my act I say I'm psychic. Just like Dunninger and Kreskin. I say it for the reasons of entertainment, but I play it completely straight with no disclaimers etc. Does that make me a bad person?

Well, actually I am psychic but that's another discussion for another time. For the purposes of this discussion let's just say that I say I'm psychic as part of my show.