This is an interesting post but it's performer-centric rather than spectator-centric.
Is the spectator aware of any of these concepts?
Um... no.
Therefore, these points aren't relevant to the serious performer, ie the performer who cares about RESPONSE rather than impressing other 'serious mentalists'.
And thus, you miss the point completely and I fear, deliberately.
I’m not a “Magician” I am a Mentalist a PSYCHIC ENTERTAINER and whenever I use a magic trick the value behind what I do drops in the mind of the patron. . . seems to me Dunninger and Bob Cassidy both have echoed this very point.
Personally, I think from the point of view of WHAT WORKS, not what I 'have need' off. I don't 'need' a peak wallet. I have used peak wallets. I have used billet switches. Both to great effect. I don't 'need' either. And yet, I am currently after a peak wallet.
No, this is a magician’s thinking and thus, magician’s logic so as to justify this form of codependency on toys; both, from our love of gadgets and likewise our inner-magpie.
Am I then not a real mentalist? Since the spectator's experience of my performance is what counts to me, and since the spectator doesn't know whether I'm using a, um, 'James Bond' gimmick or not, it doesn't matter to me one way or the other.
No, you’re a magician doing Mental Magic vs. Mentalism. The spectator doesn’t need to know that you are using a gaffed wallet, they need but suspect something is not kosher because the use of said device (and I’m referring mainly to peek wallets) is NOT NATURAL or COMMON within real world Psychic work. Any proper student of Mentalism that’s done the recommended footwork of visiting the spiritualist camps and visiting psychic upon psychic to see how they work and speak would know this but hey, this is the 21st century to hell with what’s worked for most of the past century and just lessen the one aspect of the magical arts that still has some sense of “Magick” to it – let’s ask them to use the clean hand, offer them a sugar cube, and claim that we can psychically link the Chinese Rings as well.
And let's face it, a billet switch (for example) requires skill, but getting away with an obvious gimmick such as a peak wallet without getting caught also requires skill----more psychological than physical, which in a sense makes it MORE of a mentalism thing than a magician thing...
Again, a magician’s argument but one that actually explains the truth behind this issue of codependency – LAZINESS – it’s easier to use the gaff than actually apply one’s self to learning the craft. . . but then, we see the same thing in traditional magic don’t we, always looking for short-cuts vs. doing things properly.
Your logic ties in with the same logic people give when it comes to the Center Tear, another quite ignorant technique that’s quite popular to Magicians that want to do a Mentalism TRICK while frequently avoided by the majority of working mentalist because of its illogic. . . I’m not saying we don’t use it altogether, only that we are quite picky as to when and how so as to remove the illogic; Bruce Berstien and a few others (myself included) have written a good deal about this. I did so because of a challenge given to me by Rick Maue; to learn how to appreciate and work with techniques I loathe. . . Rick won (as did I) in that I finally found a small clutch of bits in which said technique could be used that made sense. . . I’ve not found this with ANY peek gimmick I’ve seen over the past couple of decades
So who's the bigger man? Who's the REAL mentalist? I'd argue that it's the person who gets away with using the gimmick.
Not so, I watched Goshman get away with all kinds of “dirty” moves of the likes I simply can’t believe he did, but his personality was 90% as to why he did. Yes, there are ways of making the wallet “invisible” and “unimportant” that is not my argument. My focus centers on the fact that it is not how a real psychic in the real world works, you will never see them do such a thing and for that reason you/the performer, draws suspicion upon himself and what he/she is doing. As I said, you turn whatever it is you do into a Magic Trick, which is perfectly fine if you don’t mind your public calling you a Magician, which I’d be willing to bet, most of them will do in your case.
But, hey, don't mind me. I'm not a REAL mentalist. I'm merely an open-minded person looking at the effect from the spectator's point of view. So, my view doesn't count.
I doubt that you’re as “Open Minded” as you think you are and you’re certainly not seeing things from the perspective of the spectator that’s used to psychics and how they operate.
As a showman you might have what you need for your personal comfort and skill-set. I’ve written extensively and in a very positive way on this very point and how certain limited use of Mental Magic can add significant production value to one’s act. Similarly, and as you’ve hinted at, personal style can help obfuscate such dependence issues when it comes to gimmicks of this type. This does not discount what I and others before me have stated and some of today’s leading performers have echoed.
I’m one of those anti-playing cards in mentalism as well, that does not mean I avoid them completely however, just as I haven’t totally ignored the peek wallet scenario in those settings that allow me to cancel out the illogic of the thing. . . I may “borrow” someone’s wallet for the safe-keeping of a slip or maybe, such as in my Murder Mystery shows, the wallet belongs to the corps . . . whatever distances me and the idea of it being a personal possession, which is my biggest point – it doesn’t make sense nor will you see such in actual practice amongst professional psychics (vs. the charlatans who may)
(Have un-ticked 'notify me when posted' as I'm not interested in getting into a lame argument. I've made my point clearly. Feel free to entirely disagree, everybody. Personally though, am rather tired of reading patronising posts telling people that they're not a real mentalist simply because they've bought a product, or expressed interest in buying a product.)
I’d say that the greater truth to this statement is that you’re tired of hearing the
preachers telling you a truth you don’t want to accept; that there is a difference between doing proper Mentalism vs. Magic Tricks. What you detest is that someone is trying to guide newbies – to challenge them – to THINK rather than running out and picking-up some new neat gadget that actually weakens them when it comes to the creation of mystery vs. the creation of a puzzle for the sake of performer’s/pack-rat ego.
I went through a similar process of “filtering” what I purchased/invested in, when I did traditional magic and grand illusions, it is what I was taught from the starting gate coupled with what I was forced to learn the hard-way via that wonderful slow-boat Mail Order used to be. . . nothing like waiting 4-6 weeks only to find a piece that is essentially worthless e.g. you get a pulse on things and learn to ask yourself the tough questions, which is really all I’ve said in this case – consider what’s involved with such a device and how it will be perceived by your audience and similarly, if or not you’re willing to risk their disbelief in what you do because of your own lethargy and being afraid of doing solid billet work or pre-show for that matter.
The “argument” is only “Lame” when one walks away without understanding the “point”. I fully understand your view on several levels but you seem quite closed to weigh what I’ve said and what it actually means. . . possibly (and based on what you’ve stated) due to the fact that you know your own shortcomings. . . denying works that way, after all.
I too, have no reason to “argue” but I do have an obligation to point out where you are seemingly (deliberately?) sought to misrepresent what I’ve said and the reasoning behind it. You’ve chosen to not understand the “challenge”/lesson being encouraged and have no desire to do such because you are content with where you are and what you do, but even Larry Becker will admit that he’s more of a Mental Magician than a “Mentalist” and his reason for this is sound – HE’S A SHOWMAN FIRST AND FOREMOST. He’s never denied being a magician just as Dunninger and others have chosen to not do. Yet, there is a huge faction within Mentalism (always has been it would seem) that embraces a far more “real” feeling approach even though they are showmen. One contemporary many young people are now looking up to is Jerome Finley who does in fact, strive to come off as “real” which is exactly how I was taught to approach this side of the craft and I can only pass on what I’ve been given.
), but there is nothing odd about having both a wallet and a business card holder.
"sigh" -- to cover bases here before another tangent is ran off and words put into my mouth. . . I'm not saying you can't have "Mental Magic" bits in a show, such material creates a tension break which the more pure demonstrations of Mentalism can generate. Too, Mental Magic bits create production value which is an important marketing element (something buyers look for). So having one or two routines in a half-hour show that hint at being "Magic Tricks" are perfectly fine when set in context.
. Really looking forwrad to receiving mine soon.
