|
|
Mindpro Eternal Order 10586 Posts |
I'm noticing many posts over this past year have been with regard to shortcuts to hypnosis - hypnosis without trance, rapid inductions, no teesting, no deepening, no progression, just wanting to quickly bypass many aspects of a performance just to get "to the good stuff". Not wanting to truly understand the two essenttial aspects of performance hypnosis - first and foremost being an entertainer and all dynamics that go with it, and then the hypnosis aspects. Is this simply due to lack of commitment and effort, is it simply magicians not really wanting to do hypnosis but something that resembles or can pass as hypnosis, or some other reasons?
We hear plennty of excuses for not getting proper training - no training in my area, I have no money, I'm just a students, etc. Is this an extension of that? Where have all the interests in the drama, theater, progression of a performance and the mystery of hypnosis gone? Is there no longer interest in creating a "performance" or a "show" or is it just simply sticking someone's hand to a table? |
Rus ANDREWS Inner circle 1451 Posts |
Hi mindpro
Firstly happy new year I've never really thought about hypnosis until I stumbled across a few videos online as thought to myself "that looks quite interesting" I then decided that I would have a play with te ideas mixing them with magic at the same time, I was directed to anthonys work te trilby connection which was my first base and an interesting adventure that was, I learnt a lot of what I needed to get me going on this road I wanted to Persue. Since then I have been studying from books and training in a hypnotherapy course to takenthis new interest of mine further as I can see the potential it has to also not just entertain but help others as well. I don't think it is merely a shortcut, just people don't mention the other studies they are doing as well. All the best R |
dmkraig Inner circle 1949 Posts |
Mindpro, one of the skills of jugglers is to make a skill that is actually somewhat complex and challenging look easy. Of course, pick up three juggling balls and people find out that it takes practice to learn the skill. This practice is often made easier if someone actually shows you what to do and gives you hints and tricks and methods to speed your development of the skill.
Professional stage hypnotists also make hypnosis look easy. As a result, people think it should be easy to learn and they should be able to read a book or two and be able to do instants in, well, an instant. When they learn, much to their dismay, that they actually have to (gasp!) practice and learn the skill, they get upset at the messenger who gives them that news. Steady on... |
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
When I worked at Magic Inc. I was informed that we did not sell tricks, we sold dreams. This is the problem with the sale of magic.
This is also why lots of people who take up hypnosis think this way... IT IS SOLD THAT WAY. It is not their fault. They are bombarded with imiages and promises of fast learning, big bucks fast and so forth. It is how it is packaged. Now in the past decade there is a plethera of new information out there. Some good, some not so good and then you get the phenemena that exists with people new to magic. They think that because they can do a DL and a criss cross and know the tricks that say Michael Finney knows they can do the same thing he does. Experience is discounted. I do not blame the people who have this stuff sold to them. It really isn't their fault. In reality they are sort of victims more than anything. Look at the amount of people who have come through this place absolutely on FIRE with admiration for themselves. Youth (Not so much in time, but in time spent learning.) is preyed upon by unsavory purvayors of absolute crap. The last thing that comes into play is the following. There are places that you can go spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to learn how to levitate. Now who is better off, the guy who thinks he did learn, or the guy who thinks he got ripped off? Hypnosis has few if any real "secrets" and it in reality is not all that difficult to do. To develop a level of moderate proficiency requires little more than the guts to actually try. Being entartaining and actually having a career for decades is another matter. Many want to do nothing more than stick hands to the table and that is cool. If that is their goal, then I don't mind. It doesn't impact me in the least. So for those random reasons I think that is an answer LOL.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
Jesse Lewis Loyal user 227 Posts |
I honestly think it shows more on society than anything else every one wants everything instantly these days and while an instant induction is useful and looks cool I wouldn't do one on stage.
For me they also look to dangerous for my clientele. I prefer to have a more dramatic two or three minute induction people like to see the process of hypnosis as well and watch the process. Instants in my opinion for stage leave out an important dramatic element.
Learn how to build a bigger business at www.showbizsuccesssecrets.com
|
Anthony Jacquin Inner circle UK 2220 Posts |
This has nothing to do with shortcuts and much to do with increasing choice.
It is customary for students with one mentor or teacher to be introduced to their field of study gradually, like a slowly unfolding mystery, so that by the time they can see their subject as a whole they have been so thoroughly imbued with the conventional patterns or at least the personal often misguided view of their mentor that they become unlikely to question even basic premises. This is a real shame. Perhaps the value of the Internet is it is easier to access a wide range of expert opinion and therefore less likely that you will invest so heavily in one warped and dated view. If an induction is not required and clearly it is not, then you have a choice. Present with or without an induction. Progressive does nto get better results than rapid. You have a choice. If you want to spend ten minutes on it because it is entertaining in your hands, recognize it is just a very slow flourish. If you want to drop them on the floor, it is a fast flourish, but either way that is all it is. Choose. Anthony
Anthony Jacquin
Reality is Plastic! The Art of Impromptu Hypnosis Updated for 2016 Now on Kindle and Audible! |
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Anthony you are missing the point. I don't think anyone is downplaying the quick inductions, or at least I am not. I have chosen, they are not for me. I move on.
I think that mindpro is talking about something much bigger than simple inductions. There is absolutely nothing new in speed inductions. What do you mean by "warped and dated view" exactly?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
Anthony Jacquin Inner circle UK 2220 Posts |
I read the first line of his post and it characterised 'short cuts' with the example of rapid inductions.
I do not see them as a short cut, just an alternative. Having just one mentor/trainer can lead to a student picking up their views and theory of hypnosis to the detriment of a broader knowledge base that would improve flexibility. Many of the ideas churned out about hypnosis are warped (only 20% can experience hypnosis)and dated (inductions are necessary). Anthony
Anthony Jacquin
Reality is Plastic! The Art of Impromptu Hypnosis Updated for 2016 Now on Kindle and Audible! |
bobser Inner circle 4178 Posts |
... but there will always be arguments. ie: if the student picks the 'best' trainer, who knows everything else but has his own chosen model/models that he teaches, then there might be no real reason to ever go anywhere else (this has been the way of most hypnotists since the mid 19th century and nobody has shouted "problem")
And there are many clever people out there who totally and absolutely disagree on the very simple question: "Are inductions necessary?" I have to say I can honestly understand both arguments, which are of course always based and dependent upon: WHAT an induction actually IS (let's not do that now, I only have 3 or 4 hours spare this evening ) There might even be an argument that says: THIS (any book you want to pull off the shelve) is hypnosis..... any the rest is simply narrative. And of course there are some I know who couldn't even construct or understand any of the arguments, but they're simply as good as any other hypnotist in the world at getting exactly the same result. Which I guess must **** off some intellectuals?
Bob Burns is the creator of The Swan.
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-01-05 15:29, Anthony Jacquin wrote: Many new ideas are just outlandish. ANYONE can be hypnotised against their will for example.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Of course inductions are not necessary. Not the question. Is it good theater to use them or not to use them is really the point to me. Lots of things "can" be done, but "should" they be done? I think people are asking the wrong questions.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
quicknotist Special user 888 Posts |
Like Danny, I try not to get too wrapped up in what other people are doing and focus on my own work. That's the reason I manage to avoid most of the arguments here.
I do tend to jump in when I feel safety is compromised or anything else which potentially impacts on me and my profession. But an influx of less-than-average entertainers? That's never really bothered me. I really don't think that much has changed. I just think training is simply more accessible these days. I believe what we're seeing here is a distinction which runs through entertainment hypnosis in its entirety, not just the currently marketed short-forms. There are quite simply (and from what I see, there always has been) hypnotists who do performance and performers who do hypnosis. I am and I prefer the latter and of course so do clients and audiences. Now when it comes to learning, I don't see anything wrong with existing performers wanting to learn the hypnosis bits or non-entertainment-hypnotists wanting to learn some aspects of performance. As a trainer too, I have taught both, enabling some excellent performers to go out and perform hypnosis but also enabling some hypnotherapists to either gain more clients by demonstrations which draw on some performance techniques or helping them to incorporate more phenomena into their practices. (I expect most people who turn up to the UK training Jon Chase, Todd Newton and I have planned next year will fall into one of those categories. Note: All three of us are entertainers first, hypnotists second... as well as educators.) In live training or mentoring, I try to work out who I'm dealing with and adapt the training to suit. That's obviously not as easy to do with mail-order or online training. However, regardless of the marketing, availability, delivery and quality of training resources, there will always be non-entertainers out there who believe that just because they learn the hypnosis part, this automatically makes them a performer. By the same token, there are accomplished hypnotists out there who believe that a few bits of performance technique automatically makes them entertaining. Both groups are wrong and this becomes apparent when either group tries to make a career out of entertainment hypnosis. There are also a number accomplished performers who after maybe dabbling for a while, for whatever reason, decide hypnosis is not for them. Personally, I don't seem to attract, see or hear from many of another smaller group who seem to be mentalists/magicians (of varying levels) who just want to add a bit of hypnotic style phenomena into their existing act. So, I really can't comment but although I think I can see why Mindpro sees this as completely separate entity, I have to wonder how big this group really is. |
hypnokid Regular user 172 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-01-05 00:30, Mindpro wrote: Hello Mindpro. Do you mean that to perform well with hypnosis you need to do teesting, deepening and progression? What if you could achieve the same results without (both hypnosis and entertainment), would you still need to do them? Quote:
Not wanting to truly understand the two essenttial aspects of performance hypnosis - first and foremost being an entertainer and all dynamics that go with it, and then the hypnosis aspects. Is this simply due to lack of commitment and effort, is it simply magicians not really wanting to do hypnosis but something that resembles or can pass as hypnosis, or some other reasons? I think it is people not wanting to do hypnosis the same way it has been presented for at least 50 years and I think it says nothing (positive or negative) about their abilities to entertain or understand hypnosis. If anything, it shows they want to do something different and that means creating, innovating or developing in a different direction. What you consider shortcuts, others might think of as skipping unnecessary rituals - they and their audiences might find different approaches entertaining. Quote:
Where have all the interests in the drama, theater, progression of a performance and the mystery of hypnosis gone? There is an argument that hypnosis becomes more interesting and entertaining when much of the mystery is removed. The mystery of why it works still remains. Quote:
Is there no longer interest in creating a "performance" or a "show" or is it just simply sticking someone's hand to a table? I think reducing it to a 'this or that' argument is silly. There are hypnotists who choose to not use inductions, deepening, or tests and entertain well (such as Anthony Jacquin) and then there are traditional stage hypnotists who don't take any of the shortcuts and fail badly (such as, well, maybe you can read my mind). HK
Too much style to be a stage hypnotist.
|
hypnokid Regular user 172 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-01-05 16:03, Dannydoyle wrote: Great point. Is it good theatre to use inductions? That depends on the presentation; there is an argument that no-induction hypnosis can be more powerful as the hypnotist appears to have done less to achieve the same results. Equally, the appearance of a change of state or entering a trance can be a powerful look. Horses for courses. The only way to know whether a different format for hypnosis performance will work is to try them out. It would make sense to me that those seeking different presentations are not those that have been doing traditional shows for years - if it works, why fix it? So if the ones experimenting do not have years of stage hypnosis experience then it would seem reasonable that while doing their research they ask questions on an Internet forum that appear to be elementary to veterans of the stage. I still think they are trying to answer the question: What can I do that would be most entertaining with hypnosis? Some may not have good answers and some may have appalling answers but I still think they deserve credit for trying. If they are suited to performance hypnosis then they will probably find better answers in due course. HK
Too much style to be a stage hypnotist.
|
Rus ANDREWS Inner circle 1451 Posts |
Why is it considered a shortcut when someone takes a non traditional route to learn something new?
R |
Anansi Regular user 195 Posts |
Nobody liked Alexander's solution to the Gordian Knot.
I guess a lot of people like traditional.
ars est celare artem
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » You are getting sleepy...very sleepy... » » Why The Shortcuts? (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |