talkmagic.co.uk

Craig Browning wrote:I'm not claiming to be "psychic" I allude to the idea that I may be real... big difference!

Eh? I thought you were a psychic entertainer?!?!!

Gah! The mind games!

To be fair, I can understand you getting annoyed at people who mix things that are so obviously magic, with mentalism, such as the sponge bunnies. But in my little table-top routine that I am working on, when I use cards it is for a demonstration of a phenomenon, and is not used in the place of a better means of selection - by that I might mean that they are able to use their intuition to find a certain card within the deck (completely hands off from me and a regular deck, which rules out the use of gimmicks); what I don't do is have them choose a card from the deck as opposed to think of one, for example. I might also use Kenton's "Bicycle Black and Silver Deck" effect. In this respect, the cards are merely a way of demonstrating a phenomenon that could not easily be demonstrated any other way.

To me, this is a fair way of using cards - when everything is pretty much hands-off and completely above board. That's my view when it comes to these things.

I'm not really a fan of Blaine or Angel either, although I do admire Derren's performance abilities. I have become a bit annoyed though by the number of people who have taken after him and started saying that everything that they do is down to psychological techniques.

Cardza wrote:

Craig Browning wrote:I'm not claiming to be "psychic" I allude to the idea that I may be real... big difference!

Eh? I thought you were a psychic entertainer?!?!!

Gah! The mind games!

To be fair, I can understand you getting annoyed at people who mix things that are so obviously magic, with mentalism, such as the sponge bunnies. But in my little table-top routine that I am working on, when I use cards it is for a demonstration of a phenomenon, and is not used in the place of a better means of selection - by that I might mean that they are able to use their intuition to find a certain card within the deck (completely hands off from me and a regular deck, which rules out the use of gimmicks); what I don't do is have them choose a card from the deck as opposed to think of one, for example. I might also use Kenton's "Bicycle Black and Silver Deck" effect. In this respect, the cards are merely a way of demonstrating a phenomenon that could not easily be demonstrated any other way.

To me, this is a fair way of using cards - when everything is pretty much hands-off and completely above board. That's my view when it comes to these things.

I'm not really a fan of Blaine or Angel either, although I do admire Derren's performance abilities. I have become a bit annoyed though by the number of people who have taken after him and started saying that everything that they do is down to psychological techniques.

I see no wrong in what you describe here, it's normal and very much acceptable... my buddy Michael Paul has a "Spectator Cuts to the Aces" routine that is totally mind blowing you migh like as an adjunct to what you've described. I loathe card tricks but I appreciate solid card magic and Michael is, in my opinion, one of the new kids right on the edge of breaking out into the big world and make a name for himself... he's impressed Lovell sufficiently too, so it's just a matter of time.

Yes, I have enjoyed watching Derren work the few times I've been able to get a copy of his show ( we are so deprived here in the states...) But the catch is, his "this month's flavor" just as Henning was 30 years ago, Copperfield 25 years ago and Siegfred for much of the past 40 years.

My "disgust" of playing cards within mentalism is simply the fact that 99% of the people that use them, use them for doing a trick and "they" (the cards) are the focus vs. the tool or a "side item we just happen to be using". The other thing is as I've stated before, I have not left a show in which playing cards are featured that the audience isn't talking abou the "Card Trick" the performer did... If it came off as a Card Trick, you did it wrong! (unless that was you intention... such as Kreskin often does).

I actually do use playing cards in a lot of the stuff I do but hardly ever have a visible deck anywhere near the stage. I actually allow people to visualize them... that's the whole excuse for using them isn't it; the fact that they are something most are familiar with, etc.??????

So if that's the case I don't need the physical deck on hand and this removes from the public's psyche that I am just doing a "card trick"


JUST A QUICK TRIVIA NOTE.... the term "Psychic Entertainer" was coined by Mentalists back in the mid-1970s and within about a decade's time, taken on by the shut-eye community so as to increase their scheduling opportunities.

seems we just can't win from going backwards...

I can see that the use of bog standard playing cards in Mentalism just screams 'FAKE!!!' but how about Tarot cards - wouldn't they be accepted without question in a mentalist routine?

Craig Browning wrote:Michael Paul has a "Spectator Cuts to the Aces" routine that is totally mind blowing you migh like as an adjunct to what you've described.

Thanks for that - has he got any work out yet? I've run a search but couldn't find anything.

Mandrake wrote:I can see that the use of bog standard playing cards in Mentalism just screams 'FAKE!!!' but how about Tarot cards - wouldn't they be accepted without question in a mentalist routine?

Ahh! Not necessarily, Mandrake!

To expand upon the example I gave above, if I were to give you a pack of cards - and I have done this before - and asked you to try deal through the cards and stop on the one single card that you felt was the Two of Diamonds, for example, and you did just that - without me touching anything, and then stopped on one card - and if you held that card and it never left your fingertips, and you turned that over and it was indeed the Two of Diamonds, and the rest of the cards on the table were completely normal and indifferent, could you call that fake? No gimmicks, no sleights, completely hands off from me (just a lot of psychology!).

And along these lines one good example of apparent psychic phenomenon with cards is the example that Kenton Knepper details in his marvelous book 'Kentonism'.

And there are quite a few good tarot card routines out there as well; I think that Luke Jermay might be bringing out some material that uses them?

I'd certainly be impressed- and entertained. If the cards were regular cards then as an Magish I'd be less impressed than if they had a more unusual appearance. Specs probably won't be put off by the use of ordinary cards but I was just wondering if the effect would be stronger with the use of 'unusual' cards such as a Tarot or some other old style deck.

I think it's up to the performer and what he/she is trying to convey whether they would be better off using Tarot or even Rhine Cards. I happen to close my show with Tarot and a Q&A styled bit I've developed over the years but I do so for ulterior reasons... interestingly, I use that some logic when I close with an Astrology or Numerology or Graphology theme... I'm priming the pump for back of room sales after the show.

Cardza... I'll try to find a link to Michael's stuff for you.

Mandrake wrote:but I was just wondering if the effect would be stronger with the use of 'unusual' cards such as a Tarot or some other old style deck.

Ah, right, okay, I get confused easily .

Craig Browning wrote:Cardza... I'll try to find a link to Michael's stuff for you.

Thanks!

???

How come this thread got kicked back up after so long in hiding... no new posts that I can find. . . did the forum get the hick-ups?

Maybe the forum had a problem with all the bile and had to wretch it up?

I'm not aware of any movement involving this thread, perhaps one of the other Mods moved it back or, pehaps, it just went into hiding like Brigadoon only to reappear 5 years later....

Craig Browning wrote::shock: ???

How come this thread got kicked back up after so long in hiding... no new posts that I can find. . . did the forum get the hick-ups?

I just read this too ... then saw the dates (as I also thought ... what the heck, havent I read ALL of this before over and over again on this forum?)

I'm gonna throw in my 2 cents anyways though, because I feel that in the last few years I've grown as a performer and I know 100% that my style has changed.

First off - a PURELY psychic trick, untouched with a deck of cards (imo) is mentalism ... an ambitious card routine with Tarot cards is MENTAL MAGIC.
My views are that its MAINLY down to the presentation; I've seen many (MANY) "Mentalists" use VERY VERY expensive props (all worked by a man off stage) and present themselves as mind reader, psychics etc ... if the performance is bad, then it screams FAKE FAKE FAKE, but with the right presentation and acting (isnt that what we all do?) then oh my god ... I left the theater white faced, jaw on the ground a tbh, a little scared to be alive.
(NB, I'm NOT saying that all mentalism uses props / fakery off stage etc ... many magic items do too ... lets not get off track)

The way that I see it is that there are far too many fakers / tag alongs out there; Magicians who want the "next big trick" because its been on TV, non magicians who want a force deck to impress a girl in a bar cos David Blaine has been on TV, Magicians who want to be like Derren Brown, Chris Angel etc and (worst of all) people who have FAR too much money and want to be a pro magician / mind reader like "meduim" or "The Mentalist" off of TV.

I do see a divide, but I see it in exactly the same way that I see people who use camera tricks and claim to be magic, people who mine and claim they can sing etc ... if there is skill in your work, then who cares? if people leave after being entertained and feel amazed then (within reason) who cares? I get annoyed if I see magicians on TV (certain recent shows?) who I feel don't deserve to be there / are fake / cheating the system .. but who cares, the people who watch it are entertained, so I just shut up about it, hahahahahaha (again, not saying that people shouldnt have opinions, but no-one is gonna agree with you 100% of the time on 100% of things are they? Do what you do, how you do it ... if it works, then fair play, if not, then you suck )

Dan