|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next] | ||||||||||
Caveman Regular user 118 Posts |
Thanks for your response Funsway, I can appreciate what you're saying.
"If you cannot find mystery and 'awe&wonder' in the world around you, how do you plan on communicating that to an observer?" There's something, for me personally, about magic, mental magic, mentalism, that draws me in, and creates a human interaction that I find very fascinating. For me, it creates a greater sense of mystery and wonder as I have interactions with other people...leaves me wondering what will happen next, and allows me to remain open to the possibilities. In the course of this thread I wasn't really commenting on the awe and wonder that I find in the natural world around me. If you got me started on the rainforests of South East Asia, the mountains of East Africa, the Grand Canyon, child birth...etc, etc, I could go on and on. The wonders of the universe are an infinite source of inspiration. "Why not work on experiencing the "real thing' as preparation to sharing this wonder with another? Before you decide to perform magic or mentalism or readings or shamanism always ask, "what is it I am pretending at?" When I'm giving a reading, pretending is the last thing I'm doing, and I'm not a shaman, nor would I pretend to be. Should I decide to become a Shaman, I assure you I will take it very seriously. Experiencing the real thing is exactly what I want Funsway, it's what we all want, I think. We can have the real thing if we allow our mind to experience it. Magic outside of an entertainment context allows for that possibility. "Even the phrase "created in the mind" implies an outside force or manipulation." I would counter, that little is created inside the mind without outside force or manipulation. "But why the focus on "performed?" That's exactly what I would like to get away from. But hey, if someone has worked hard to develop their talents and would like to showcase them in a theater, I can dig that too. "The "real magic" is that they might do the same for me." I completely agree. |
|||||||||
One Inch Man New user 74 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 8, 2017, Adrien L. wrote: It seems to me that the only person who wants to talk about propless name guesses is you! If you hadn't made your initial post asking about it, nobody would be talking about it now. You ask above if you are missing something. I suspect what you are missing is the fact that Martin's first reference to propless name guesses in this thread was nothing more than a parenthetical. In this case, it was a specific example (in brackets) designed to simply illustrate the point he was making. Namely that the cultural diversity of your audience can have an effect on what and how you perform. That's it. It wasn't relevant to the thread as a whole, only to the preceding sentence. However, I don't wish to speak for Martin and, if I am wrong, I'm sure he will correct me himself. While I'm here though, although against my better judgment, I way as well comment on this too. Quote:
On Oct 8, 2017, RCP wrote: You can't rewrite history but that doesn't mean you have to repeat it. Just because the original mentalists were shameless hucksters and scam artists, doesn't mean people using those techniques today have to abide by the same questionable ethics. A large portion of the sleight of hand employed by today's cardmen has its roots at the card table and in the hands of crooked gamblers. That doesn't mean that someone performing Anniversary Waltz to an elderly couple at their restaurant table has to con them in a rigged game after their meal. Three card monte was created specifically to rip people off, but someone doing a monte routine today isn't duty bound to actually relieve the audience of their money during the performance. Pickpocketing techniques are even more obviously designed to straight up steal stuff from people, but someone performing a stage pickpocketing routine is not obliged to actually steal any of their audience's belongings. I agree, we shouldn't ignore the uncomfortable past, but we shouldn't feel the need to replicate it either. Quote:
Lots have come before with many of the same notions, lots moved on and are defrauding the unsuspecting having gained a new morality. I would argue that those who 'moved on and are defrauding the unsuspecting' did not gain a new morality. They simply found a self-serving echo chamber that justified, and even celebrated, the questionable morality they already had. |
|||||||||
Adrien L. Elite user 479 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, One Inch Man wrote: If you're happy with that explanation, I'm happy that you're happy |
|||||||||
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, One Inch Man wrote: Great post, One Inch Man. Everyone knew what I was talking about. You don't have to be a mindreader -real OR entertainment based- to know that some people are just trying to start an argument for the sake of it -and then act the innocent when they're called out on it. |
|||||||||
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 8, 2017, RCP wrote: I genuinely feel sorry for people who view mentalism in such a fashion. I can't comprehend wanting to live your life scamming people out of money by using tricks and deceit when you could be bringing beauty, wonder and joy into people's lives by entertaining them using the same techniques. |
|||||||||
Adrien L. Elite user 479 Posts |
Yeah... I'm the one acting innocent. I'm such a troll
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, Martin Pulman wrote: |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
"little is created inside the mind without outside force or manipulation. "
I could not disagree more - but that is a topic for a different forum. I find the phrase "if we allow our minds" somewhat amusing/perplexing. Is not that a contradiction of the quote above? I will agree that many people today have stultified imagination and need some glittering bauble or dramatic event to command their brief attention -- in this a performer (or any manipulative external source) may provide a valuable function. Sad, but better than no authentic experience at all. "I do not do magic - but it happens all around me and sometimes I get blamed." faucon of Sakin'el
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
RCP Inner circle Two Minnie's in The Hell's Half Acre, The Republic of Texas 2183 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, Martin Pulman wrote: It's taken awhile but we are almost full circle. From the original Guru thread "When I work in any semblance of a metaphysical situation, I work clean. Just actual intuition. If I am using trickery, it must always be clear that I am entertainer. I have no idea what is in this DVD, so don't get me wrong - this could well just be marketing hype - but being a guru (which means spiritual teacher) is something that you can't (or at least shouldn't) trick your way into. And if you did use deception in order to get honestly seeking people to think that you are something that you are not, I think it's different than presenting mentalism as entertainment. Different as in bad. LL=MM" The moral/ethical dilemma our young friend confronts rises from the fact that deep down anyone doing mentalism knows they are manipulating the minds/emotions of the mark. We know we are doing it for OUR GAIN, not theirs. Now that gain might be innocent or not on our part. Just doing a show for a fee, just entertaining friends for fun, coning a girl for sex, building a reading clientele for profit, defrauding widows. One can't claim to "work clean" when in fact you are using all the techniques learned from mental-ism or entertaining as a mentalist. Seriously ask yourself "what are my qualifications to be an intuitive" Did you graduate high school, read a couple of books, have any college, any advanced degrees to qualify as a counselor or religious advisor? Do you have a home, a family, any money, live pay check to pay check? When a woman with 3 children and no job asks if she should leave her husband whats your intuition tell you? and do you have that right? and are you doing it for her or YOU? What impressions did you leave during your show and what are those repercussions if you accept any additional contact. A disclaimer is in fact a very old con tactic to begin grooming the mark. I do applaud your exploration and seeing the growing dilemma you will face. I came down this path 10 years ago, many helpful and knowledgeable people still here, many gone following other paths. Many famous mentalist have very dark pasts. If you just want to do some mental magic tricks than you can avoid confronting these issues but if you choose to go down the rabbit hole..........at least be honest with yourself |
|||||||||
Philemon Vanderbeck Inner circle Seattle, WA 4694 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 8, 2017, RCP wrote: I was paid AND I entertained querents. Everyone left happy. This is not an either/or situation. It is a mutual transaction between two consenting parties. They want a little mystery in their lives; I want to pay the bills. Supply and demand. I did not take advantage of anyone who came to my table. They sought me out. In fact, Microsoft pays my fee and the querents get the readings for free. I don't even accept tips, nor do I try to upsell private readings. Querents just want a little attention and reassurance that they're on the right track.
Professor Philemon Vanderbeck
That Creepy Magician "I use my sixth sense to create the illusion of possessing the other five." |
|||||||||
Philemon Vanderbeck Inner circle Seattle, WA 4694 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, RCP wrote: I recommend the following book for anyone who wants to provide full-length private readings: https://www.amazon.com/Becoming-Counselo......24519132
Professor Philemon Vanderbeck
That Creepy Magician "I use my sixth sense to create the illusion of possessing the other five." |
|||||||||
RCP Inner circle Two Minnie's in The Hell's Half Acre, The Republic of Texas 2183 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, One Inch Man wrote: Humans seem to have a history of repeating the same mistakes. There doesn't appear to be any generational dna towards wisdom. We all suffer from not knowing what we don't know and some suffer from not being honest with themselves. Or maybe they do but just put forth a persona to help their scam. If you want to be a magician/actor doing shows acting like a mentalist, just like cardmen doing gambling slights, you don't have to confront what mentalism really is. |
|||||||||
RCP Inner circle Two Minnie's in The Hell's Half Acre, The Republic of Texas 2183 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, Philemon Vanderbeck wrote: You are one of the good guys that helped me understand and anyone wanting to be an "entertainment mentalist" should pattern their approach after yours. The book you recommend is very good. There is rampant mental illness being made much worse by the isolation hiding under social media. Those considering going down the rabbit hole should ask themselves did you give the las vegas shooter his last reading? Was he at your last show? Food for thought, what Apache princess name am I thinking of? |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
There seems to be a theme here that giving a reading means offering some solution or prediction. Where does that come from?
Within the greater scope of divination approaches, methods and ethics, there is no requirement to offer a prediction or resolution. Often times, either stopping the process or giving the seeker some homework to do is advisable. Likewise, legitimate divination approaches do not require any claim of special powers or need be seen as paranormal. They certainly are not mentalism or magic, though a seeker or observer may decide to place that spin on the events in the story told after (possible denial of accountability). Again, one must always consider the expectations of the seeker/observer in balance with what you offer to do. The fact that techniques may be involved often employed by mentalist (such as reading body language), does not make the divination or reading mentalism or trickery. Yes, one might develop heighten intuition over time - best used to avoid giving readings to folks just playing around unless that is the agreed objective. The last reading I gave took eleven hours over three days. Divination can be a very serious process. The final "presentiment" was an echoing of words she had volunteered and not a prediction at all. All I gave her was the confidence to follow a path of her own choosing. (courage?) Since then I have turned down requests for a "soothing." The seeker could not define a problem that would benefit from a divination process. I have no problem with those doing readings for fun or profit as long as they consider the ethical questions involved and are clear on what they are doing. I do object to performers trying to wrap all forms and approaches to divination or mind reading or any other activity into the limits of their own perceptions.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
RCP Inner circle Two Minnie's in The Hell's Half Acre, The Republic of Texas 2183 Posts |
What did you get out of it? Money, personal satisfaction, superior feeling? Are we to believe you gave up 11 hours and got nothing in return for yourself? Are you a counselor?
Or are you an unqualified magician taking a mark. That may not be bad, no acuzation implied, there are lots of licensed therapists that are frauds and harmful. |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, RCP wrote: You seem to be projecting your own bias/fears here. I am pleased you "can't believe it" - makes it more exciting and impactful. I never charge for Soothing. The only thing that matters is what the seeker got out of it. Curious that you would want to know what I got out of it. Why would that matter? Why would you think I "gave up" anything? Everything that we do in life provides material for self-appraisal and personal improvement. Call it an investment if you like, but that implies an expectation of a beneficial return. The greatest rewards come when you expect nothing. There is a book titled "Fain Faire Sooth" that you may wish to read. It takes the reader through a personal Soothing process while exploring the logic of "Selfless Soothing." There are other things I can do to earn cash.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
RCP Inner circle Two Minnie's in The Hell's Half Acre, The Republic of Texas 2183 Posts |
We clearly aren't speaking about the same things.
The thread was "Performing mentalism outside of an 'entertainment' context" and then asking for the ethics of mental-ism in that context it's pretty clear that's not what was sought It should be called I'm a magician trying to be a mentalist but have no clue what that really means but I am seeing some things that are making me uncomfortable |
|||||||||
Mindpro Eternal Order 10587 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, RCP wrote: Hilarious! |
|||||||||
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 8, 2017, RCP wrote: Orson Welles dealt with the issue of mentalism in a non-entertainment context in the early 1930s? I'm a big fan of Welles as a film director. I knew he was heavily into magic but I was unaware he had made any pronouncements on mentalism at such a young age (he'd be what? A teenager? 20/21? It would be fascinating if you could expand? |
|||||||||
Last Laugh Inner circle Grass Valley, California 3498 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 9, 2017, RCP wrote: I get the feeling that you see the act of giving a reading (or even performing mentalism) as a zero sum game. If one person is getting money (or whatever) then the other is the 'mark'. I don't believe that all transactions are like that. I think mutual benefit is fine. Even if that benefit is only entertainment. (Also... I'm really not that young. I am just blessed with a baby face. I'll be 40 in February.) Regarding working clean, I did readings before I did mentalism. Was I working clean then? I don't believe my relationship with the oracle has changed significantly, but obviously that is subjective. But I don't intentionally or consciously use any deceptions when doing a reading. To me, that is working clean. If I peeked or used marked cards or any mentalism technique, THAT would NOT be working clean. Even so, most of my reading work is at a party or event where I'm hired to be there as entertainment. Even so, I treat it as separate than mentalism where I do use deception. To me they are separate things. I'm going to assume that your subsequent questions about qualifications are rhetorical, but rest assured I (like many other readers) do not offer advice that is beyond my qualifications. This subject has been much discussed (Iain has a great book worth that covers this excellently). I'm sure you can make arguments that there are always going to be possibilities of negative outcomes, but that's unavoidable with.... life. The same could be said for friends or family that ask your advice. Or a random word to a stranger even... Nonetheless - I hear your point, but I can't say that I agree that it's simply all a con. To me there is a possibility of mutual benefit. Entertainment is valuable, art can be enlightening and inspiring. To me, mentalism is a performing art. If that makes me a 'mental magician', then I have absolutely no problem with that. But then the argument becomes semantic. I just don't see readings as inherently a con though...
My Mentalism Podcast:
The Mystery Arts Podcast Check out my products! Direct from me (PW: cassidy) On Penguin Magic |
|||||||||
Mr. Woolery Inner circle Fairbanks, AK 2149 Posts |
I freely admit that I am currently rather sleep deprived and not at my peak, brainpower-wise. That said, I'm having some sort of disconnect with what I believed a mentalist to be and what RCP is referencing.
We started with an excellent question about whether people use the same techniques that most of us call mentalism in a context other than performing. Then, RCP introduced an additional element to the definition, reframing the whole question as one of whether we are even doing mentalism if we don't defraud people. Unless I misread this: /quote "The moral/ethical dilemma our young friend confronts rises from the fact that deep down anyone doing mentalism knows they are manipulating the minds/emotions of the mark. We know we are doing it for OUR GAIN, not theirs. Now that gain might be innocent or not on our part. Just doing a show for a fee, just entertaining friends for fun, coning a girl for sex, building a reading clientele for profit, defrauding widows. One can't claim to "work clean" when in fact you are using all the techniques learned from mental-ism or entertaining as a mentalist." /end quote So, now the question that I think has to be answered before this wrinkle can be ironed out is what is a definition of mentalism that we all agree on? I might be taking the quote above completely out of its intended context (again, I am tired and being rather slow at the moment, so I could be totally wrong about RCP's intended message - it isn't deliberate), but it looks like a definition like this would exclude a number of people who I think of as mentalists who I also believe to be more interested in entertaining than in defrauding their audiences. Richard Osterlind, the late Bob Cassidy, several people on this thread, heck, from his writings, I'd even include Theodore Anneman. (Certainly I've not read anything by him that promotes setting oneself up as a guru or claiming to be a legitimate spirit medium, but I have not read all of his works, so I could be wrong.) Were/are these folks not mentalists? Is/was their performing art not mentalism? Does it become "mental magic" the moment I would rather share a moment of mystery than make a few bucks? I don't really get it, so there we go. But changing the definition in order to deflect the conversational narrative is an all-too-common tactic. It creates a can't-win scenario because it changes the understood rules in favor of whoever defines the terms. I'm not saying that's what is happening here, I am saying it looks like it to my tired brain. I'd like to be wrong and get an understanding that goes deeper than what I currently have, not just of this topic, but of mentalism in general. -Patrick |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Performing mentalism outside of an 'entertainment' context (47 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.13 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 < |