talkmagic.co.uk

I have both the DVD set and the book. I found the DVD set a bit better just for reasons that Osterlind updates some things and gives a bit more advice. Plus not to knock the book. But it was written in 1960 UK. So when you're living in the states and it's the year 2010.. Finding some of the things he mentions can be a huge pain in the ass. Osterlind also talked about how there were a few effects in the book that are not doable. IE: the Whispering Buddha.

I'm almost the opposite, i find PME more inspiring... love annemann...if i were skinny and less hirsute, i'd have his moustache and haircut...



thats not to say corinda is by any means less than PME, its certainly not, the interviews alone are worth buying 13 steps...and thats before you get stuck into the techniques...

i see 13 steps like being taught the skills and techniques of how to paint...and PME is the inspirational books of art that i look through to see what the masters created...

*ponce mode off*

That is a good point actually...one thing I noticed when browsing annamenn is that it does have some interesting presentations in there

purely for learning though, if i had to choose one it would be 13 steps

I now have a good theory as to how this works, but it requires one assistant.

While it is true there are "lottery" prediction effects in Thirteen Steps, I've always laughed at them because of the simplicity of the methods; a good method should combine within itself four or five methods, plus "misdirections" as to how you are doing it. The prediction effects in Thirteen Steps have always seemed so much "weaker" and "easier to understand" than anything else I've ever seen - though I cannot deny it is the best book I have ever bought; I daily use much of the material, though I do wish it would explain things rather than merely allude to them.

Currently I have an effect in my act exactly as described below:

A small toolbox hands above the stage/room on a string. Six balls are thrown into the audience, and six people each choose one number; this gives us an apparently random six digit number. The box is then lowered and a seventh person is randomly selected and invited up on stage to open the box. They do so and remove a small brown envelope. Inside this envelope is a large peice of paper, printed onto this piece of paper is the six digit number.
I then "explain" to the audience exactly how I did it, by pointing to the UV writing on the back wall, reading the exact six digit number, written in advance (or so it would seem).

The fact that I, a mediocre mentalist at best, can create and perform such a thing at my college, with no stooges, £50, a toolbox and my sister, gives me unrealistically high standards for everything. There is a line in Mentalism, somewhere there is a line when a trick becomes a "strong" trick. The ESP card matching routine from [iParalies[/i] is a good example, it completely baffled magicians when it was first shown; because it employs three different methods, and a "misdirection".
Osterlind's ESP card matching routine from his "Easy to Master Mental Miracles" DVD, uses only one technique, is blindingly obvious to figure out, and cannot fool a baby.

I know I am opening a can of worms when I say that there is a line in Mentalism, between good effects and weaker effects; but I am sure the line exists... I don't know where... but it does. I have little doubt that a massive argument is about to ensue about where the "line" is, but hopefully someone somewhere will learn something useful.

I admit I do suffer from a bad case of CUPS; however I also am an excellent speed reader, and currently have read all my Mentalism books at least twice. I am currently trying to put together a stage show, and I think its roughly one third complete (material wise); but I refuse to add anything to it that is not "strong".



Tom
xx

Ted wrote:Just buy Corinda. Then read it. 99 per cent of your questions (including this one) are answered there.

Firstly, I have it.

Secondly, WHERE?

Osterlind's ESP card matching routine from his "Easy to Master Mental Miracles" DVD, uses only one technique, is blindingly obvious to figure out, and cannot fool a baby

I performed the exact routine in Davenports with a thought out presentation and it fooled everyone. Magicians and the random laymen that randomly walk in.

Paul Brook performs the same effect on youtube under a psychological guise and the reaction is brilliant.[/quote]

maybe if you didnt use your speed-reading skills, you'd see it...

Eshly wrote:...there is a line in Mentalism, between good effects and weaker effects; but I am sure the line exists...

It's always in the presentation, rarely in the method. And with that I will leave you to read, ponder and create. Best of luck.

You're pretty much dead wrong. Why should an effect need a c*** (not the best) ton of methods just to achieve a single effect. maybe if you want to fool magicians, but when it comes to entertaining lay people. More often than not, the simple and direct stuff usually will totally blow their mind.

Lenoir wrote:

Osterlind's ESP card matching routine from his "Easy to Master Mental Miracles" DVD, uses only one technique, is blindingly obvious to figure out, and cannot fool a baby

I performed the exact routine in Davenports with a thought out presentation and it fooled everyone. Magicians and the random laymen that randomly walk in.

Paul Brook performs the same effect on youtube under a psychological guise and the reaction is brilliant.

[/quote]

How could they NOT understand it? I knew the entire trick before the explanation ever even began; and that was my first ever Mentalism DVD, it was even before I had 13 Steps.



(also, people still don't say WHERE in thirteen steps it is; its not a pocket index, its not a swami. It could be an assistant with a printer... but I hope not. And thats not in thirteen steps.)

You're pretty much dead wrong. Why should an effect need a c*** (not the best) ton of methods just to achieve a single effect. maybe if you want to fool magicians, but when it comes to entertaining lay people. More often than not, the simple and direct stuff usually will totally blow their mind.

It won't. Thats why I never use Equivocate or anything similar. If there is any chance what so ever of the method being discovered, I do not use it. I think I have a fear of looking like a prat. (I do anyway)


Tom
xx

Eshly wrote:I've always laughed at them because of the simplicity of the methods; a good method should combine within itself four or five methods, plus "misdirections" as to how you are doing it. The prediction effects in Thirteen Steps have always seemed so much "weaker" and "easier to understand" than anything else I've ever seen

Only because you're a magician. Try 'em out on a layperson, and see what kind of reaction you get

You really do have no idea what it's all about, do you? Honestly, I suggest you become a book collector, a designer, an armchair mentalist, but don't worry about performing. It won't work.

Lenoir wrote:You really do have no idea what it's all about, do you? Honestly, I suggest you become a book collector, a designer, an armchair mentalist, but don't worry about performing. It won't work.

Lenoir, I know you're trying to be helpful, but give me something here.

So far this has happened:

1. I have asked if it is a marketed effect. It is not.

2. I have asked where in 13 steps it is mentioned. No one has yet said.

3. I have suggested what I feel is actually a very plausible explanation, and people say I am dead wrong with absolutely no alternative hypothesis.



Needless to say I shall work on this; try and borrow a flat bed scanner and a laptop and create the effect, but the use of an assistant will be irritating.

Tom
xx

Eshly wrote:I've always laughed at them because of the simplicity of the methods; a good method should combine within itself four or five methods, plus "misdirections" as to how you are doing it. The prediction effects in Thirteen Steps have always seemed so much "weaker" and "easier to understand" than anything else I've ever seen

no no no no no no no no no no no no no NO NO!

Jeeeeez!

complex does not mean good! Simple does not mean bad! That is not to say complicated stuff is always bad and simple stuff is always good, but oh my "dunford-on-a-christ-deck"!

Are you saying that you would never use an ID because it is "too simple" and doesnt employ every other method under the sun? What about a billet switch - too simple? Impression pad...card force...instant stooging...dual reality...

all of these are one method and can create some of the most baffling effects to a lay audience. Stop thinking like a magician, and start thinking like a layperson! It doesnt matter if the method you use is "simple"...they dont know it!

also:

I admit I do suffer from a bad case of CUPS; however I also am an excellent speed reader, and currently have read all my Mentalism books at least twice. I am currently trying to put together a stage show, and I think its roughly one third complete (material wise); but I refuse to add anything to it that is not "strong".

This is alll wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Speed read mentalism books? You can't physically do that and take everything in. I have had 13 steps and annamenn for coming on 4 years now, and every time i read it, I find another 30-40 effects that I have completely forgotten about.

Re-read 13 steps. Read karl furves.

and bloody read alchemical tools...you might learn a lot about methods and presentation in that!

Here is a transcript of a conversation that changed my life, 2 years ago, with a fellow mentalist:

me: "I want to learn some genine psychological effects...not to just use billet switches and sleight of hand"

him: "why?"

There you have it. Why do you want it to be complex? I've been working on my show now for the best part of over a year, and it is being peformed in a months time. I am cacking it. I have done so much wrong it is unbelievable. But you know what I have done correctly? The effects!

Why is this? Because I have taken out anything complicated I had a final show about 2 weeks ago...and I have edited it even now to take out something which was too complex to pull off on stage at my current skill level, whilst still shownmanship...ing

Slow down. I'm not going to ask you o re-read. I am asking you to sit down and actually read the book for your first time in your life.

And I know you think that 13 steps is toilet...I was new once - you haven't learnt to appreciate it yet

As for the ESP card routine it's also taught on another DVD and the method is just dead simple and yet it works. The only reason you keep thinking simple things won't work is because you are thinking in Magician terms. You think everything needs to be super complex and hard to follow. When it doesn't. With magic and specially with Mentalism, often times, the simplest stuff is often the most baffling.

But hey, if you want to go the to the extra effort just so you can prove to yourself how smart you are. Go right ahead. It won't do squat to get you bookings or a decent part time career as an entertainer. But it should make you feel better about yourself.