(Close Window)
Topic: "Man of Mystery" or "You are all psychics" ?
Message: Posted by: Nestor D (Sep 2, 2014 03:05PM)
David Berglas says (roughtly) he is a man of mystery : he wants his audience to know that what he does requires skill and talent : he is special.

Uri Geller on the other side says (roughtly) that we all have psychic power deep in ourself and that we just need to awaken them.

As far as I know, other psychics present things Geller's way while other mentalists (I believe Bob Cassidy is on this side but I might be mistaken and I'd be delighted to read his take on the subject) present it Berglas's way.

I have three questions :
How strict is the distinction between these two philosophies (is there realy a distinction ? For some, there is : the spectator can not take the magician's place during an effect.) ?
Is it a matter of "being a magician" / "being a genuine psychic" ?
What is your take on both (Do you say to your public that they are psychics without knowing it ? Why ?) ?
Message: Posted by: psychicir (Sep 2, 2014 04:31PM)
I will let Bob answer for himself but the idea of him presenting things like David Berglas is hilarious! David does (or did when he was active) pickpocketing and a levitation in his mental act! But it was never a mental act anyway. He once stated that he never called himself a mentalist and it was a definition that other magicians ascribed to him. By saying he was "a Many of Mystery" that allowed him free reign to do magic, pickpocketing and mentalism sometimes in the same programme. One of the best performances I ever saw him do had no mentalism in it at all. Cigarette manipulation, card tricks, vanishing and appearing cane and he always finished his show whether mentalism or magic with pickpocketing.

Bob, on the other hand believes in playing it for real from what I understand. It should also be realised that a mentalist is not the same as a psychic. A psychic does readings and had nothing to do with show business in any way. A mentalist is a performer and it is an entirely different skill and one has little to do with the other.

I AM a psychic but am not a mentalist although I know a fair bit about it. I am also a magician. I am not sure there is any rule. You have to do what fits your personality and your inclinations. Some people play it for real, some imply psychic power without coming straight out and saying so, some mix magic with mentalism, some even present it in a comedy fashion and nowadays some do this half hearted NLP and Psychology stuff. I must admit that I laughed out loud when Bob called it the age of trivialisation on another thread.

There are a lot of arguments about which way is the best way and I am not going to get into that. That is up to the individual performer. If he can't figure out which style he should use I recommend the use of a pendulum. That might help!
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Sep 2, 2014 04:38PM)
Psychic - relating to or denoting faculties or phenomena that are apparently inexplicable by natural laws, especially involving telepathy or clairvoyance. Or relating to the soul or mind.

from the early 19th century: Greek - psukhikos (which sounds a little like peter hurkos!)

some mediums are psychic, some aren't...
talking to the dead is mediumship, not psychic...
psychic entertainment is (as far as I'm concerned, though no doubt will be corrected if I'm wrong) is a no disclaimer, theatrically driven performance of mentalism, where people are left thinking what they have witnessed is real or not..
Message: Posted by: psychicir (Sep 2, 2014 04:51PM)
"Psychic entertainment" is a new fangled phrase for mentalism. In other words fakery on stage no matter whether it is presented as reality or not. That is the plain honest truth of it. I have never seen a stage mentalist do things without trickery of some sort. They may well delude themselves that what they do is genuine like a method actor convinces himself that his part is real but I hate to break it to you all but real, it ain't. On the other hand a real psychic who does readings doesn't need trickery of any kind. It is a different skill set entirely and one has nothing to do with the other.

As for Peter Hurkos I knew a fellow psychic who was a friend of his and told me wonderful stories about him!
Message: Posted by: PaulPacific (Sep 2, 2014 04:56PM)
I am both a psychic AND a mentalist. Although they are related cousins, they are VERy different types of work.

There is another thread here on the Café about working at psychic fairs. I have done hundreads of them myself (as psychicir knows) but I never have the strength or desire to comment about them.
Message: Posted by: psychicir (Sep 2, 2014 05:02PM)
I am sorry, Paul. I have read your posts on the Magic Café and had no idea you did psychic fairs. I have of course heard about your ability as a ,by all accounts, charismatic stage performer. I do agree with you that they are very different types of work. Very different indeed. I do appreciate that you have no desire to talk about it but I do have to ask you one question. On the other thread Jerome and somebody else (I apologise for forgetting who) said it was "fun". I have to confess that I don't find it "fun". Do you?
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Sep 2, 2014 05:04PM)
Talking of method acting...
Message: Posted by: Nestor D (Sep 2, 2014 05:06PM)
My parallel between David Berglas and Bob Cassidy is only on the "it requires skill and talent : he is special" part, not their act, disclamer or anything else (and I can't speak for them : I might (and certainly) have misunderstood what I read).

I am thinking about my position on these questions (it's time to crystalise some solid personna...) so I am curious about my predecessor's answers and the reasons behind it. Does it really all boils down to one's personna ?

(A pendulum! why didn't I thought about it sooner : that's my universal answerer :) )
Message: Posted by: psychicir (Sep 2, 2014 05:09PM)
Another question, Paul. This time as a performer. Do you ever get obnoxious spectators who can't resist saying in front of everyone, "I know that one!" or "I know your secret!" After all there are always people who feel that they have to blurt out something to everyone instead of keeping quiet. I wonder if mentalists get it as often as magicians do? I seem to get it rather a lot but then I am a magician rather than a mentalist.
Message: Posted by: psychicir (Sep 2, 2014 05:12PM)
Actually Nestor, you don't need a pendulum. I have an excellent and equally metaphysical way of making decisions that I tell all my clients about. I even go so far as to give them a leaflet explaining it. Here it is:
http://luzialight.wordpress.com/2012/07/05/make-divine-decisions-with-this-easy-muscle-testing-technique/
Message: Posted by: Scott Soloff (Sep 2, 2014 05:15PM)
[quote]On Sep 2, 2014, IAIN wrote:

psychic entertainment is (as far as I'm concerned, though no doubt will be corrected if I'm wrong) is a no disclaimer, theatrically driven performance of mentalism, where people are left thinking what they have witnessed is real or not.. [/quote]

My disclaimer near the top of my show is as follows:

"Everything that you are about to see and hear is based upon half-truths, tall tales and complete balderdash. It is pure theater!"

Even with that statement at the preface of my program, a significant portion of the audience leave believing what they have witnessed is real.

Go figure.

Best wishes,


Scott
Message: Posted by: IAIN (Sep 2, 2014 05:18PM)
Disclaimers are pretty much futile as far as I can see...
Message: Posted by: Scott Soloff (Sep 2, 2014 05:21PM)
No doubt!
Message: Posted by: psychicir (Sep 2, 2014 05:28PM)
Scott's disclaimer would make people MORE likely to believe he was the real thing for psychological reasons which I have no energy or inclination to get into. FAR better than a challenging outright brazen claim that you are the real thing.
Message: Posted by: Scott Soloff (Sep 2, 2014 05:52PM)
[quote]On Sep 2, 2014, psychicir wrote:
FAR better than a challenging outright brazen claim that you are the real thing. [/quote]

I thought so...