|
|
Dr Spektor Eternal Order Carcanis 10781 Posts |
OK.
Please tell me how you'd "classify" Houdini, Dunninger, D D Homes, DD Holmes, Uri Geller, Alexander & Annemann using the following choices, and explain your choice for each in a max of one sentence: Mentalist Magician Reader Psychic Spiritualist Other ---- My thoughts: Houdini - Other: Combined mentalism, magic, escapism and learned how to replicate seances etc. Dunninger - Other: Combined mentalism, magic, spirit effects, etc. DD Holmes - Other: Spiritualist who used mentalism and magic to create his effects Uri Geller - Other: Psychic and Entertainer who loves Randi who made him famous - used mentalism and magic techniques Alexander - Other: Mentalism cast in a very messiah atmosphere using all the tricks of the trade derived from the Fox sisters, DD Holmes and through in some magic too Annemann - Other: You do realize he loved card effects, don't you? ---- The reality to me is, any of the people who get successful don't care about the artificial restraints put out there.
"They are lean and athirst!!!!"
|
Necromancer Inner circle Chicago 3076 Posts |
Hi Bruce,
I think the big question isn't how we would classify them, but how the public would. To achieve fame as these men have, one needs an immediately telegraphic "hook" that people can use to classify one's persona or skill set; this is independent of the exact tools employed. Within those constraints: Houdini: escape artist/magician/anti-spiritualist crusader (his role varied during his career) Dunninger: mind reader D.D. Holmes: medium Uri Geller: psychic Alexander: seer Annemann: mind reader Best, Neil
Creator of The Xpert (20 PAGES of reviews!), Cut & Color, Hands-Off Multiple ESP (HOME) System, Rider-Waite Readers book, Zoom Pendulum ebook ...
|
Dr Spektor Eternal Order Carcanis 10781 Posts |
That is the crux neal - where I think all the threads are going off into madness... there is a public moniker... and then there is the backroom we are in - what do WE think?
Cuz to the outside world, we might all be classed ENTERTAINERS versus SPIRITUAL GUIDES versus THERAPISTS versus EDUCATORS... You can see how mucky this can get.... And you just put our a few good ones in terms of "subclasses" - sheesh, we might have to right up the Dungeonmaster and Player's handbook of Mystery Performers... Halfing Paladin / Seer / Druid Orc Mage / Psychic (Psionic 300) Human Psychic / Assasin Anyone want to play Ravenloft in Spooky? Make your characters..... I'll work out an adventure.
"They are lean and athirst!!!!"
|
dmkraig Inner circle 1949 Posts |
Bruce and Neil, I would respectfully suggest that the question shouldn't be HOW we would classify them, but WHY we would classify them. If someone doesn't like mind reading, by classifying someone as a mind reader you eliminate them from being considered as an entertainer by that person.
Why do you feel a need to put any of these people into a classification box? |
Necromancer Inner circle Chicago 3076 Posts |
Quote:
Why do you feel a need to put any of these people into a classification box? As I stated earlier: Quote:
To achieve fame as these men have, one needs an immediately telegraphic "hook" that people can use to classify one's persona or skill set. It's what the public does; it's the nature of communication. You can't be all things to all people. And quite frankly, if somebody doesn't like mind reading, and that's what I do, then they shouldn't be considering me. They would only be disappointed. As a working performer, I'm trying to nudge this discussion out of the realm of the theoretical and into the realm of the marketable/practical. But maybe that isn't what you have in mind? Best, Neil
Creator of The Xpert (20 PAGES of reviews!), Cut & Color, Hands-Off Multiple ESP (HOME) System, Rider-Waite Readers book, Zoom Pendulum ebook ...
|
MentalistCreationLab Inner circle 1528 Posts |
Hi Bruce, I have to agree with Neils assessment on the classification in regards to the men you asked about. With only one addition. I would add publisher to Alexander.He wrote and published his on stuff and founded the Crystal Science League. He at times was also referred to as a charlatan. Now that's my kind of guy.
With Holmes medium is a word to describe him. As for Harry, well my opinion is well known as to what I think of that guy. Nice to see someone mention Holmes as his name is seldom spoke these days. Cheers |
David Numen Inner circle 2070 Posts |
OK, based on recollections of these characters from my youth here is my pre-tainted-by-mentalist-cynicism opinion.
Houdini - magician and escapologist. Someone/thing disappears and it's "done a Houdini". D D Home - medium/psychic. Uri Geller - Psychic. Mindbender! Alexander and Annemann are not names the current public would know and whilst Alexander was famous in his time, Annemann wasn't and I wouldn't say is a useful template in the same way as those mentioned above. Houdini and Geller are still household names. |
dmkraig Inner circle 1949 Posts |
Quote:
To achieve fame as these men have, one needs an immediately telegraphic "hook" that people can use to classify one's persona or skill set. And yet they have different hooks so it proves nothing. Further, if "magician" is a hook, why is it that Joe Baloney, magician, is unknown while David Copperfield, magician, is known? The "hook," as you call it, isn't enough. You may also notice that many mentalists and/or magicians who do mental magic prefer to use a different "hook" as an identifier rather than "mentalist" or "magician." Quote:
That's an interesting limiting belief. I wonder why you choose to hold it? Quote:
And quite frankly, if somebody doesn't like mind reading, and that's what I do, then they shouldn't be considering me. They would only be disappointed. Quite frankly, I think the best and most popular entertainers transcend such categories. Look at the list of things that were attributed to Houdini. Left out were: Film producer. Film actor. Pioneering pilot. First person to fly a heavier-than-air plane in Australia. Fake psychic. Vaudeville headliner. Quote:
As a working performer, I'm trying to nudge this discussion out of the realm of the theoretical and into the realm of the marketable/practical. I think taking it out of the theoretical and putting it into the marketable/practical is a GREAT idea. I just respectfully disagree with your approach. I realize that (especially since the late 1970s) forms of entertainment have become ever more categorized. In all of the record stores that used to exist, for example, popular music used to be a major category. Later, things divided into smaller and smaller categories and people wouldn't look outside of a particular category. You had to identify yourself and fit into a category to get played on a highly limited radio station and have a record in the appropriate "bin." But the great performers transcend such categories. Where does Bette Midler fit? Singer? Comedienne? Actor? Film star? Where does Madonna fit? Singer? Music writer? Music producer? Film actor? What about the Kardashians or Paris Hilton? They seem to have no talent whatsoever but they're everywhere? What about Charlie Sheen? Comic actor? Serious actor? TV star? Crazy? I would respectfully suggest that if you're looking for a category to limit yourself you're also limiting your potential audience and your potential success. I would suggest that the first thing an entertainer should do is focus on establishing himself or herself as a fantastic entertainer with a great show. Let others categorize you. They'll end up doing that anyway. |
Dr Spektor Eternal Order Carcanis 10781 Posts |
DMkraig, - exactly - I believe these terms are only partially useful... and why limit ourselves? I slowly have grown to being an Educator of the Mysterious kind of person... but I still have never settled down on one thing. Leaving things to the imagination by only partially explaining yourself is cool...
Cuz what is a Seer? Still could be a magician, mentalist, 50/20 vision man, x-ray vision person, whatever Neil has the poiht of marketing. I still think the problem is that sometimes we are talking about what we know about methods/premises for characters versus marketing hooks. Bill, glad you liked me bringing up Holmes - he, the Sisters and so on are all part of the tradition of mystery entertainers.
"They are lean and athirst!!!!"
|
dmkraig Inner circle 1949 Posts |
Bruce, I would respectfully say that if you limit your marketing by typing yourself with a label, you're limiting your potential market, and it's hard to expand your market after you've limited it.
BTW, it's not "Homes," it's just "Home" and was pronounced "Hume." I really like your term, "mystery entertainer." |
Lord Of The Horses Inner circle 5406 Posts |
Houdini: escapologist, magician, exposer (who failed to expose at least twice)
Dunninger: mind reader D.D. Holmes: medium Uri Geller: psychic / psychokinetic Alexander: seer Annemann: mind reader
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
|
Dr Spektor Eternal Order Carcanis 10781 Posts |
Heck, I market myself with many different angles. People need to have some sort of idea of what you are going to provide and perform... I actually have no designation beyond my prof. credentials
Sorry about the Holmes... got Sherlock on my mind.
"They are lean and athirst!!!!"
|
kannon Inner circle BCN 1025 Posts |
Yeah, I'd agree with LOTH
My work and the Mtangulizi here http://kannonsworks.weebly.com featuring work on drawing duplications, a fiddle-free billet tear, bar mentalism, pendulums
|
bofx Special user France 509 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-03-10 17:34, Lord Of The Horses wrote: Same point of view.
My mentalism books: Mental Sweets 1 - Mental Sweets 2
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Houdini, Dunninger, Alexander, Annemann (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 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 < |