talkmagic.co.uk

Jobasha wrote:How about something a bit more appropriate. I have vague memories of a routine using a cocktail menu, deducing the chosen drink. It's possibly a Docc Hilford idea, but maybe someone else can help with that.

That certainly sounds like something Docc would have invented! Now you've mentioned that, it's ringing a bell with me too, but I cannot place it. It's given me a good idea for a related trick, though!

Flood wrote:Thanks for the replies.

Craig thanks for the reply.If you are telling me that bringing a book around table hopping is illogical then would that same illogicality apply to bringing ESP cards,Note pads and pens,envelopes and whatever other mentalism prop.Or is your point that you think it is all illogical and should never be performed at all to begin with while table hopping

The way I see it is that a book is just a means to an end.It doesn't matter what prop,item or gizmo you have.What you are doing is demonstrating your ability in an entertaining way, be it with books,cards,pens,paper it does not matter.

As for getting people to believe....Well I did an Omni deck routine followed by a name revelation for a woman last week and she asked ''Can you actually read minds'' after my demonstration.She was a fully grown woman so she was old enough to make her own decision on things.I'm clearly a trickster yet she was willing to just accept I was a mind reader based on the effect.I think when it's all said and done people will make up their own mind on what is real and what is not.Naturally I had to disclaim and tell her it was something else but not mind reading or trickery either

I love magicians. . .

People WILL react and you WILL have those that perceive anything you do as “real” . . . when I was working a noted Beverly Hills night club long ago I was asked to stop doing Sponge Balls because club members believed it was Voodoo. . . I’m not kidding, college educated leaders of business for the L.A. Black & Hispanic communities were still superstitious when it came to their cultural beliefs. But we can say the same about folks living in Branson, MO where a stage illusionist (Kirby Vanbirch) nearly got lynched and labeled a “Satanist” because of how some of his material was structured (granted, Kirby’s pointed ears probably didn’t help matters).

As I stated in my previous post, I detest the whole mindset of treating Mentalism as you would close-up magic; it cheapens the art and robs the performer of optimum psychological advantage. I’m not saying that you can’t get reactions, you can and will. Depending on your claims you can even get away with carrying around a five hour show in your pockets just like every other MAGICIAN on the planet does vs. working as clean and “improvisational” as you can, which tends to be the primary goal of most that move from magic to mentalism; fewer props, fewer worries. . . then again, pure mentalism does require balls of brass and most in today’s world prefer working with “sure fire” methods (a.k.a. magic tricks) over taking the deep breath and just going for it.

What I suggested in response to the question, is the approach that will deliver optimum results. Yes, it’s biased in that it is how I tend to work most; exploiting the moment. Though I have a sequence planned out, I allow opportunity to trigger the path, not my pocket full of junk (which is rarely more than a special little pendulum friend named Mao Tou and my butterfly pad). When it comes to a “Book Test” scenario I will use ANY book, magazine or newspaper available and I can easily repeat the demonstration 3 or more times. Which brings us back to the real issue here; Are you a magician or a mentalist? Are you actually able to live up to the label and reputation of being a Mentalist without reliance on mechanical method?

I fully empathize with the novice that’s still learning and can understand why they would want to lean on a gimmicked method. I believe my suggestion of a day-runner/appointment book covers this and how it allows the performer a stronger psychological advantage than having some “generic” text conveniently on hand. While I may get a positive response, it could be so much more. In my case I live in an area surrounded by 5 major college campuses and so everyone is carrying books. While this means I could get away with having a book, it would have to be a scholastic oriented text in order to fit . . . not many of those lying about, outside of Dictionary type systems or the hard to find Bible Book Test. However, using the Hoy/Brook approach I can let patrons use their own books which compounds the strength of the demonstration ten fold . . . they won’t ask if or not you can read minds, they will know you do.

I refuse to use playing cards in any Mentalism bit for the most part. I’m not one of the pure NO CARDS AT ALL types, just cautious when it comes to the pasteboards due to their connection to gambling and magic tricks e.g. ease of manipulation & cheating, the sort of thing that dampens things when it comes to generating validity. Why would anyone want to run up-hill when there are logical alternatives?

I don’t care if you are taking the psychic, psychological, body language or whatever other angle you can come up with as the foundation to a Mentalist persona & claim, but as a certain gent pointed out 60ish years ago, the more props you incorporate the lower your perceived value – the less cash people are willing to give you in that folks are far less willing to invest in a fake anything over what seems “real” and genuine. You can justify things all you wish in your mind and I know for a fact that you’ll find 1,001 cosigners to those thoughts; a look at the political side of magic history however, will also show you how this same set of “explanations” brought about major rifts between magicians and mentalists, some of which are still very much in tack; the ardent mentalist never viewing what they do as “tricks”

Part-Timer wrote:

Jobasha wrote:How about something a bit more appropriate. I have vague memories of a routine using a cocktail menu, deducing the chosen drink. It's possibly a Docc Hilford idea, but maybe someone else can help with that.

That certainly sounds like something Docc would have invented! Now you've mentioned that, it's ringing a bell with me too, but I cannot place it. It's given me a good idea for a related trick, though!

I think there is/was one on the market that uses a P******** A****** but it's a fake menu, so no good. But on the whole the only thing I've seen on this thread for strolling mentalism that seems particularly plausible is readings. Palm reading and a bit of pendulum work I can see going down a treat.

Jobasha wrote:

Part-Timer wrote:I think there is/was one on the market that uses a P******** A****** but it's a fake menu, so no good.

That was how I was going to work it.

It wouldn't be a bad method, but would like it with the actual menu from a bar. Might steal a Wetherspoons menu next time I'm out.

i personally wouldnt use a book test unless there was a good reason for their to be a book. I guess a dictionary would be fine.

There are a million ways to justify a book, but that doesn't mean it's easy.
Look a Canasta's Test...no justification, just brilliant showmanship and people didn't start questioning the book.

Talking about book tests, Does anyone have The Davici Zone by Max Maven

I'm reminded of one of Max Maven's, in Prism, but it's not in any way a book test, or even a menu test. About five people name different drinks, and then he predicts which drink from that list a sixth person would choose.

I haven't seen Max's "Da Vinci Zone", but I do have the "Da Vinci Book Test" from Trickshop. It's more a stage thing than walkaround. It might be dated now that the Da Vinci Code isn't top of the best-seller list, but it does a good job of working the atmosphere of the book into the effect.