(Close Window)
Topic: Do you Favour old or new mentalism?
Message: Posted by: Hypnotic Winter (Aug 20, 2004 01:04PM)
Do you favour the old or the new or Boath, I've had people not want to even look at a book before just because the date was over ten years old.
I Find old books on magic and mentalism just as good as the new, in fact I use some of Houdinis origional magic.
What inspired me to start this topic was, today I was just leafing through Corinda while having my lunch, every now and then I will go back and read some part of it and I came accrsos one of the most simple and ingenus card effects I've seen, these type of effects you pay a good deal for today.
Has any one elese found the material in these old books as valuable?
Message: Posted by: mindhunter (Aug 20, 2004 01:09PM)
Just as much, if not in many cases more so. Much of the "new stuff" are permutations and elaborations of the older and not all are improvements.
Studying the older gems in Annemann, Corinda, et al. can be just as rewarding if not more so than picking up a recently published book.

Bryn
Message: Posted by: johne (Aug 20, 2004 01:10PM)
I really enjoy the old effects HW...like you, I can pick up an old book and see some real gems that were hiding away last time I read it.

I think it is "The Young Magician's Handbook." This book is packed with effects. I can find something new every time I flip through it. I also has a nice section on mentalim.

With "Practical Mental Magic" I try to only read through the effects, so I get more of a layperson's feel for the them. If I too quickly read the methods, I come across thinking it is too transparent to use. I really am fooling myself. The book is great.

I like new reading and new ideas too. Idea on Billets really keep my interest since I do like to use my hands a lot still.

John e.
Message: Posted by: Mystery (Aug 20, 2004 01:45PM)
I must confess that I work more with "old school mentalism".
The "new wave" has a lot to offer but psychological subtleties, Knepper stuff and building blocks aren't reliable enough yet to stand on their own, in my experience. Perhaps it's just me, because I'm not self-assured enough to pull it off, I don't know.
But I think the old and new schools complement each other quite charmingly.
I wouldn't care for a one-track mind in mentalism...
Message: Posted by: discjockey (Aug 20, 2004 05:03PM)
I would agree that "old school mentalism" didn't include psychological forcing and such. while I perform some of the new stuff, some of the books that pioneered mentalism (corinda, annemann, etc) are the ones that stick out. think about it: those books were like Knepper's back then. it was the huge craze for mentalists in their day. some worked then, but not today. just like maybe psychological forcing wont work in another fifty years. who knows?
Message: Posted by: Hypnotic Winter (Aug 20, 2004 05:09PM)
I always feel that any sort of psyclogical methods using suggestion or otherwise should always be backed up by sure fire methods. for example if you bend a spoon in another persons and your suggestion as tho the tectile nature of the spoon do not take hoild at least you end up with a bent spoon which is still very impressive.
I mix the new with the old all the time, but the old always work but as we know in mentalism, is doesn't always have to ruen out 100 percent so you can get away with pure suggestion in my opinion.
Message: Posted by: Roth (Aug 21, 2004 02:23AM)
As a couple posts suggested "the new is the old".
Many of Anneman and Corinda's effects have been updated and converted to modern day effects that are on the market today.
There is a blackboard effect in Practical Mental Magic that was converted into a card deck routine that many of us have.
Message: Posted by: mindhunter (Aug 21, 2004 07:11AM)
As Myster said, an awful lot of the current mentalism items offered for sale today use bits and pieces from these two works, and many are just minor reworking of the complete effect.
There is a lot of "new" mentalism to be learned from these old works if you dig enough and much is quite good.

As an example, I took an original Annemann manuscript "3oth Century Television," which he even says was an older idea, and made it up using modern materials. It plays very well and if someone today were to "modernize" the gimmick as I did and market it it I have no doubt it would be described as "new & commercial!" in the ad when in reality it is about 100 yrs. old.

Bryn