talkmagic.co.uk

The alternative is to simply create an alter-ego -- a stage persona and "character" that is a mystic...

I don't have an alter ego, I just highlight my eccentricity.

SamGurney wrote:

The alternative is to simply create an alter-ego -- a stage persona and "character" that is a mystic...

I don't have an alter ego, I just highlight my eccentricity.

Yes, it's not a good idea to create a completely fictitious stage persona. If it's not some facet of yourself, you'll never be able to inhabit the role properly or believably.

Robbie wrote:

SamGurney wrote:

The alternative is to simply create an alter-ego -- a stage persona and "character" that is a mystic...

I don't have an alter ego, I just highlight my eccentricity.

Yes, it's not a good idea to create a completely fictitious stage persona. If it's not some facet of yourself, you'll never be able to inhabit the role properly or believably.

So much for that line about "We are but ACTORS Playing a Part" :roll:

Yes, what Robbie says is quite true... for MAGICIANS. But, if you are first, an actor who happens to learn or know magic, the story is entirely different.

I remember one of my fighting coaches years ago pointing out that you can always teach a boxer how to use his feet but you must pay the devil to get a karate student to learn how to use their hands...

It's the same thing in the magic world; There are several very noted and respected Actors that have done magic over the years and came to know exceptional acclaim in doing so. But you find exceptionally few fans of magic that are willing to invest themselves FIRST into the theater and the art of being a true thespian, allowing that element to be are the front of everything else they do. Most, as Peter Pit used to say, "Hide Behind the Tricks"

If you are a good showman and have learned how to get out of your own way and "become" the character, you can make them believe anything. I'm doing it with my new incarnation and it's a major transformation. But it's not an impossibility IF you are willing to get a director and acting coach to help you mold it all into a working "thing"... something the majority of magic fans refuse to do, including those that think themselves "professionals" but the biggest named pros out there will tell you how much they had to learn along these lines, including make-up and wardrobe factors... things that very few of us ever weigh.

If you learn how to be a showman first, you will be able to excel in whatever genre of show biz you choose in life.

Well I can't really afford acting classes at the moment, but I read as much as I can on the topic, namley the stranislawski (I think It's spelled t like that) books. But other than magic I am very interested in psychology including Paul Ekman and the like who study facial movements and actions and kenisics or body language- I found it invaluable as a device in acting, not just knowing about body language but other sections of psychology and methods of eliciting various emotions. While studying acting I have found an awfal lot of it is psychology. Linguistics is another minor geeky hobby of mine and it allows me to understand vocal activities more in acting. What I have deduced from my ( admittedly elementry) studies, is that by far the most conincing and engaging actor is the one who believes himself- and how better can that be achieved than by retaining part of oneself. As anyone who knows anything about lying *ahem* will tell you, the best way is to keep elements of the truth in there.
But, most importantly you want to let your audience warm to you and become involved and taken in by your 'character'. For this, in my experience, by FAR the best way, is to entertain them. And God help any magician who ever forets he is an entertainer first of all.

What you describe as your interests suggests that you are (and don't get me wrong when I say this) going with the flow and what's of current vogue; the intellect claiming to use Body Language, NLP, Suggestions, etc.

In the 80's two type of acts were very popular, the Channing Pollock styled Bird & Manip act and the Grand Illusion "I want to be Copperfield" act. Both viewed by insiders as "Clone Acts"... they were all the same, same general content, presentation style, etc.

I bring this out ONLY to challenge you a bit when it comes to originality and allowing yourself to be a bit more than the same old thing everyone else claims to be these days a.k.a. a Derren Brown or Banachek clone... and trust me, even when you think you've changed things enough to escape that association, talent buyers and other trained eyes will see it. So try to be more creative with your effort.

That said, within the vein of what you describe you could include a bit of magic. Kreskin goes so far as to say that one of his hobbies is Magic and "here's a neat thing I just picked up..." it works for him and it can work for others so long as they segregate the two genres.

In the early 20th Century most of the better known performers, including the likes of Annemann and later, Dunninger, did an early evening Magic Show for the whole family but later in the evening presented a program for the more mature and intellectual or curious audience in which they explored the potential of the human mind, the power of suggestion or matters of the occult, etc. They deliberately created a stronger level of intrigue when it came to these presentations, evoking a sense of believability in what they were offering... at minimum, the possibility associated with such things. This is very important when you are attempting to do solid mentalism vs. mental magic. The latter is far more commercial as well as entertaining; even the big names inject a fairly large amount of Mental Magic into their shows for the sake of levity and production value. At the same time they carefully weave the fabric of enchantment when it comes to how and what they claim, present and cause to appear to be viable. The more real, tangible and even logical you can make your presentations the greater the public investment of belief and thus, the easier it is to do your job.

My suggestion at this point, is to look around and weigh your options. I'm confident that you can find a civic theater group willing to accept another amateur into their ranks. There are all kinds of improv groups that are 100% FREE via which you can gain a tremendous amount of experience and that's what's important... even if you're working back stage (which is where I spent the greater portion of my career... as a technician and illusion mechanic).

The other thing I'd do if in your shoes, is study the industry trends as well as the available market. You also need to get very real when it comes to what is genuinely available to you should you embrace the image & theme you've described vs. the more mystical "Psychic Entertainer" mode of Mentalism which gains the advantage of home parties, working psychic fairs and a wider sense of venue in a way that's a bit more flexible than the other.

I'm not putting down that other style, the Dunninger Mold approach is well established. Unlike the aforementioned however, this mode of course requires you to depend on the more traditional "Show Biz" way of doing things; agents, talent buyers, and investing all of your "spare time" into hustling and selling yourself and your act into the same markets all the other enthusiast are doing.

Once again, you need to think about this... if your penchant is the same as all these others; leaning on Ekman, Ericsonian Techniques, NLP, etc. WHAT MAKES YOU STAND OUT? WHY SHOULD ANYONE HIRE YOU OVER THE DOZEN OR SO OTHER ACTS CLAIMING THE SAME SKILLS?

There are subtle things you can do when it comes to "packaging" yourself and creating a "Brand" but you must first invent the product, defining it in a way that makes it "more" than the rest.

Ok, I appreciate the point about psychological presentation and the whole Derren Brown problem. However, sometimes I actually am using psychology and non-verbal communication, looking at small details and making deductions and using suggestion and influence- it doesn't always work but it is something which fascinates me. I know how horrible that sounds because that is something Derren would say and I am not trying to copy him- But Derren got me interested in mentalism and at first when I believed he was using nlp and non-verbal communication I learned as much as I could about it and developed a small repertoire of 'real' effects. Eventually I realised that he is a magician and I fell in love with that too- but before you see an imaginary pattern emerging I am not interested in taxidermy or oil paintings. It is only natural that I do a psychological explanation. I am not just following the current trend. But as was the whole point of this post, I do not confine myself to any specific category- I perform what I feel will entertain and astound, but I take the idea that the mind reading and psychological magic I am doing is real and my spectators follow suit- some don't lie to me others ask me endless questions about what signals to look for.

Ok... whatever you wish to tell yourself, but know that you can use those methods without being the same thing everyone else (especially in the UK) is being at present.

My suggestion would be that the next time you want guidance on something like this however, you ask only those that you know will cosign your current opinion on things, rather than those that will broaden your perspectives.

I haven't so far shunned your advice and I find a little bit of constructive critism most helpful, But I am not just jumping on a bandwagon as you may see it, I consider what I am doing and so I will defend my decisions.
Thanks, Sam

Craig isn't suggesting that you are just trying to go with the flow. He is insisting that you should be more unique, as it would help you to stand out.

Thanks, I try to be origional- which can be difficult to do with mental effects but that doesn't mean imposible. What I was saying though is that psychological presentation does not nessecerily equate to unorigionality. (Which by the way I am not saying you are saying about what he's saying but it's what I am saying. Just to make sure I don't confuse things.)

SamGurney wrote:

call yourself a psychic.

I think that brings the fraudulent mediums act into the picture unnecessirly for some entertainment. Anyway, I use a psychological explanation.

That may have been the case previously, but the fradulent mediums act was repealed on 26 May 2008. It was replaced by the consumer protection from unfair trading practices regulations 2008 see http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/uksi_20081277_en_1 . Basically, don't get caught lying - do a theatrical performance, as craig says, and you will be fine.