talkmagic.co.uk

Dirty minded aren't you...

Anyway - there's room for both in any performance, light and shade, rough 'n smooth, long and the short of it (sponsored by rev. lewis phd esq.)...

I just wondered on your general thoughts on the whole thought process from the participant's point of view...

Here's my example:
I write something down on a piece of card, and tell you that i am trying to project a 3 digit number to you...don't try and conciously pick up on anything, relax and then when it feels absolutely right to you, say out loud that 3 digit number...

i slide the card towards you for you to read...and the number matches...

Here's my example v.2:
I ask the whole group to focus on a 3 digit number, in a group visualisation experiment...some people volunteer their numbers and they write them down on a pad, someone else tots them up...

the number is called up...and my sealed prediction is opened, and it matches their numbers...but! we then have a local a-z flicked through, we use the total of the numbers added to find a page in the book, and then an area...the area is the one we are in conducting the whole experiment...

One takes about a minute, the other takes about 6-8 minutes...

I suppose the difference is the scripting, the first is the two sentences that set up the entire effect. The second would require full of scripting, pacing, audience management....

Do you have a bias towards one over the other? Do you really care? Does all your work have to be short and snappy? Or do you enjoy a longer more pensive and intense style of performing?

I'd have thought that it depends entirely on the situation that you're performing under. If you're strolling or table hopping then you don't really want to do anything long and drawn out, a few short snappy effect are far better in my opinion because you don't have much time and you need to keep their attention because there is usually so much else going on around to distract them.

If you're up on the stage doing a longer routine then the long and drawn out effects can work.

i have some rather strong views on this subject, which to be honest, always sound much better over a beer.

It depends on wether your talking about a routine, or a single effect.
It also depends on your animation as a performer. By that, i mean wether you leave gaps, or fill them.

as an example, ive noted several performers have a tendancy of having 1 or more dramatic pauses at the begining of an effect.

in magic/ mentalism/ other genres of our art, the dramatic pause usualy has one single reason from being there.... to highten the tension of the final reveal.

its got to be near the end.

also, the pause before the reveal, can often be way too long.
Many performers ( and i could name names ) mentaly appear to struggle like f**k before they say.." is it a cat?"


The viewers just going to be sitting there mentaly screaming.." get on with it!!" Just as they scream at who wants to be a millionaire.

I think Dara O`Brien's comments on room 101 were spot on when he put us in the room.

mentalism, more than any other branch of magic, has a flaw.

If you ask somebody to think of something, or chose something, you know damn well, mr Smart *rse is going to tell you what it is at the end of his chatter.
Therefore a routine having a number of stages, any one of which can go wrong, can distract the audience away from the enevitable conclusion.

however in a one on one situation, short and snappy is the way to go if your performing one single effect.

Its unlikely that you could get any stronger an effect, than the classic Ill write a 3 figure number... you tell me what it is... bingo....

that you have as your first example.

because in that case, you have not given them time to think anything except " what the f**k just happened!)

They're stories. You can't get involved in a short joke or fable to the same extent that you can for a long short story or novel, but if all you want or have time for is a fable, then a fable is fine.

My ambition lies with the longer effects (though I'd take issue with "drawn out" as that could mean "stretched"). I want to build greater involvement and investment from the audience. Should I ever perform.

Mr_Grue wrote:They're stories.

thats my point. nobody enjoys a story quite as much when they know how its going to end.
which is why in most cases, short and sweet is better if your performing a one off one on one effect.

in my humble opinion, i think that simple quicker effects leave the audience less chance of even guessing what happened, wrong or right.

The more people involved, there's always a chance of some sort of stooge and the more props used, the more chance they could be gimmicked.

dont get me wrong i like long effects too but think that the quick snappy ones are better for spectators.

I don't think you can be as black and white as "long tricks are better than short tricks" or vice versa, because the length of the trick isn't really that important compared to the pacing.

You can have a trick that is quite short in length, but performed very slowly, like the coin/key bend presentation where you gently stroke it and it bends very slowly and visibly. You could present that as "Can I borrow your coin? BAM! Look it's bent!" but that would totally ruin the effect.

Longer tricks need to hold the audiences attention more, so they often require a series of mini-climaxes before the finale (bingo anyone?). The example above in the first post has an example of this - the longer presentation has two reveals compared to the short versions one.

I prefer my tricks to take a bit of time - it shouldn't be about the reveal, it should be about a process which draws the audience in, which then blows them out of the water with it's conclusion.

I think it's Derren Brown who said (something along the lines of) if you get someone to think of a word, then you right it down and show it to them, the audience hasn't seen any mindreading, they've seen the product of mind-reading. The role of the mentalist/magician is to give the spectator something to see, show them some of the process you are (supposedly) going through when you extract that word from their thoughts, then instead of going away saying "I wonder how he knew what word you were thinking of" they'd say "Good lord that bloke can read minds".

I think it depends on the situation really but for me long drawn out card effect with bull stories around them bore the hell out of me but a card effect with a short story is fine but On stage a mentalism performance as suggested the 2nd option I would much prefer but that's just me