The way I see it, as a mentalist, is that people come to your show for 2 general reasons. They either think your fake or your real, and they are looking for something in your show to back up their convictions. Not suprisingly, both types always find what they are looking for.
I personally don't care what their reasons are as long as they pay for the ticket.

Chad

Do you present your performance as real? If you can REALLY do these things, then you're only limited by what YOU can believe enough to convince your audience. ESP, psychokinesis, etc. has been in the public's mind for a long time now. Most people want to believe it. The big question is DO YOU WANT TO CONFIRM THAT IT'S REAL?! I sometimes feel weird about it. Over the weekend, a woman told me she thought a force other than me was moving something (meaning a spirit force). I told her that something other than myself was helping to move it. Talk about double realities! I was talking about a gimmick and she thought I was talking about the spirits. In my mind, I told her the truth. In her mind, I confirmed that spirits exist. I have come to the conclusion that reality is an illusion created by our minds. If it looks real, do it.

Do you present your performance as real? If you can REALLY do these things, then you're only limited by what YOU can believe enough to convince your audience. ESP, psychokinesis, etc. has been in the public's mind for a long time now. Most people want to believe it. The big question is DO YOU WANT TO CONFIRM THAT IT'S REAL?! I sometimes feel weird about it. Over the weekend, a woman told me she thought a force other than me was moving something (meaning a spirit force). I told her that something other than myself was helping to move it. Talk about double realities! I was talking about a gimmick and she thought I was talking about the spirits. In my mind, I told her the truth. In her mind, I confirmed that spirits exist. I have come to the conclusion that reality is an illusion created by our minds. If it looks real, do it.

Does anybody else remember that great scene in the first Spiderman movie, where he used his X-ray vision in order to find out the information that finally helped him beat the Green Goblin?

For that matter, does anyone remember the scene in the first Batman movie with Michael Keaton, where he first shoots out his metal claws from under his skin during the fight with the Joker?

No, neither do I. As a matter of fact, both of these scenes are a little ridiculous. As any comic fan will tell you, Spiderman doesn't have X-ray vision and Batman can't simply shoot metal claws out from under his skin.

Wouldn't that make the comic book better if they had those things? More than likely, the comic book would actually lose sales. Why?

Comic book characters have certain powers, and they're limited to using only those powers. This helps the audience connect with the hero by helping them see that the heroes have limitations, even with all their amazing powers.

This idea has been the basis of not just comic books, but countless classical myths, great novels, short stories, movies and many other sources of stories and entertainment.

On the basis that creators of these places were smarter, or at least more successful than myself, I've come to believe that the concept of a character's limitation is actually of great benefit my magic and mentalism performances.

Just as a mind experiment, what if perception were reality? If someone believed that time and space were malleable, and could impose that view on the reality of others, could they bend metal? Cause something to teleport? Put their own mind next to that of another person, both receiving and transmitting thought and emotion? Perceive things which were not in the immediate area, or even chronologically coincident with the present time?

It's true that characters in fiction are caricatures; that's what makes Charlie Chaplin and Wolverine appealing. We always know that they will be true and predictable, as surely as Yosemite Sam cannot help but be outraged at Bugs Bunny. Perhaps a performer must also be a caricature, and must never allow his performing persona to be more than that. Is that what is being advocated?

Or, can the limitation of a persona be the weak flesh that cannot maintain access to the beyond? Must it be that one can only do certain things (reading, but no bending! clairavoyance, but no precognition!), or can one do many things, just not consistently and at full strength? Some can do many things that are hugely disparate in real life, like ride a bicycle a hundred miles in one day and play guitar afterwards.

Must limits be set in only one narrowly defined way...?

Scott I've heard others take on the Superhero premise that they are known for certain powers, but when we go to the Adam of Superheros, Superman, we will see he had many powers that made him Super. He had super strength, could fly, x-ray vision, turn back time, etc. If you watch the old TV show, he was also able to dematerialize through walls and even make someone float.... still no one was bothered by all those various powers.
Most of us just thought, "He's Superman... he can do anything." So, it is fine if you want to work on a personality or style that limits your powers, but only you will probably notice that... as long as it works for you that's great, but the regular public sees us as just plain weird.
Look at what Criss Angel is doing... I don't think the regular public is taking apart each effect or stunt he does in the way that we do. They see him as a weird guy who does weird things.

Greg

Greg, it's kind of funny that you should choose Superman as an example of a hero with no limits. What happens when Superman is faced with Green, Red or Gold Kryptonite? or visits a world with a red sun? Better yet, why would the writers arbitrarily place such limits on Superman?

Even Criss Angel is using limits to his advantage. All his effects, even the physical ones, are presented as having their basis in intense mental focus and training. I doubt you'll see him present Hippity-Hop Rabbits, McCombical Deck, or the Sucker Torn-and-Restored Napkin. They're too difficult to present in a consistent manner with his image.

Here is Vegas, we have plenty of magicians who just can't seem to grab the public's attention precisely because they perform as jacks of all trades. One minute, they're a gambler with legendary skills, the next minute, they're a psychic who trained for decades in the Himalayas, and later, they're a wacky comedian. They fail precisely because there is nothing for the audience to wrap their heads around.

The way you write, you make limits sound like a bad thing. If a magician should be able to do anything, as you suggest, then there's no basis for drama. If you show that you can effortless pluck dollar bills out of thin air, don't try and demonstrate you ability to cheat at gambling in the same performance. Why gamble when money as a sure thing is waiting for you in mid-air?

You are right about one thing, Greg. The audience doesn't analyze and think through the effects. They just feel a performance. They may not be able to state why something feels wrong in an act, they'll just walk away associating that "something's wrong" feeling with the performer.

Your best words Scott were: "They just feel a performance." I believe that's probably why the guys that try to do everything don't get the reactions they want. Not because it is not possible to do it all, but that they probably are just doing it because they feel it's the latest craze or the in thing to do.
If a performer, any performer, actually believes in what he is doing and really knows that he is coming from a truthful place inside of himself then I believe it is possible to do it all and also make the audience feel "right" about it.
Look, in other fields of entertainment there are people that do it all: Orson Welles wrote, produced, acted directed and even did magic and was good at all those things. Woody Allen writes, directs, acts and started as a stand up. There are many performers out there who are considered triple threats. They believe in what they do and they know how to do it well. They don't need to be pegged as just a writer or just an actor.
Now, on the same hand, there are a lot of wannabes that start off as models or singers and decide they have a talent for acting or producing or directing or writing and soon make laughable attempts in those fields.
If a brilliant actor like Robert DeNiro decides to direct or write a movie I'm sure no one would say that he is outreaching his super powers, but I believe that would not be true if Paris Hilton suddenly said she was going to direct a musical on Broadway.
I guess what I'm saying is that multiple super power theory works if you have the talent, drive, and inner strength to do it correctly, but don't go there if all you are is The Tick.

Greg

Necromancer I really resonate with your thinking. I agree that a 'show' is about creating or deciding upon the meaning first and then building your presentations around the show's overall meaning and focus. To be worthwhile as an entertainer you need a meaningful theme built into your show and also to create a sense of unity in the show through this. This should all happen before selectioj of effects even gets thought about. Look at any top professional's show, it will always have a kind of smooth flow and feeling of unity created by their routining and overall message/focus. Even a comedy magician's 'continuity gag' is a way of bringing unity to the show.

My corporate show has an overall message of 'Truth is Stranger than Fiction' and my subtext messages are 'Your intuition is stronger than you currently believe', 'We are all connected', 'Miracles are just low chance probabilities coming true through focus'. I design the show to have maximum clarity and impact through allowing the spectators to handle the props as much as possible (suggestion of normallity of props), not using flashy magiciany props and also apparently demonstrating and championing the spectator's intuition as much as possible. I think of myself as a corporate speaker with an important message & facillitator of their own abilities rather than a clever performer.

We are told this kind of thing in different ways by the top performers all the time. 'Forget the tricks, work on your other skills. Work on the stuff that turns your magic/mentalism from amusing puzzles into meaningful art'. IMHO to be a powerful entertainer or presenter at a corporate level (I am a corporate speaker and this is most commonly where I perform my show) you cannot expect just to roll up with a suitcase full of fancy props and proceed to demonstrate how clever and puzzling your mechanical wonders are. It took me a good few years to fully appreciate the truth of this but I guarantee that having an emotionally involving meaning to your performance will be the best way to have impact and also get far more rebookings. People may be impressed by your apparent 'abilities' but they will rebook to hear your message again as it applies to them.

I don't think it matters so much which specific effects you use or how you frame the ability they demonstrate, more to the point is how you are able window dress the effect and make it relate to your central performance theme and add to the meaning of the show.

Cheers,
Al