It seems to me that ones reasons for getting into a particular branch of our art are, realistically, completely their own and ultimately no one elses business. Sure, we can speculate that some reason may lend a greater chance of success but, a) that's still speculation and we could be completely wrong and b) that doesn't mean one way is "right" and another "wrong."

It's not as as Daffy is saying "I hate mentalism more than anything I've ever come across...but, boy, I'm tired of packing crap around, so I'm gonna go fake it..." That could be considered the "wrong" reason.

If he enjoys mentalism, but is MAINLY driven in an effort to increase impact and reduce weight...well...what's the problem?

E

Now that I know what metagrobalized means, thanks Dictionary.com, I would suggest focusing on the entertainment more than the fooling. I strongly feel that after you find what you are going to do as a mentalist you then have to add the magic. It is mystery and wonder that people want to see when they come to these shows, people will refer to a mentalist show as a magic show even though they may at the same time believe you can read their minds to some degree. My biggest focus is keeping them entertained. And doing this artfully and without belittleing or badgering the audience.

A good example is Three Card Monte, not really magic or mentalism, but allot of us have performed it. Once you master the slights, (and I am talking traditional gambling style here) you then have to master something else. Why would anyone want to watch this unless they thought they could win. And if you don't tell them how you did it after then why would they want to watch you do anythign. If a person is fooled they are entertained usually, but slightly embarrased, and you put them there. Somehow the effect, whatever it is, needs to reach beyond this and become art. Become mysterious and beautiful.

In the end packing small or big should be the outcome of a well designed show. I would never be able to focus my show around my packing considerations.

Thankyou!

Daffydoug,

Forgive me, I was not aware that Osterlind had said that on one of his DVDs as I haven't watched them for a while now. I knew the statement was by no means original, but it does voice my opinion on the attraction of Mentalism. I hope the rest of my post helped and thank you for pointing this out.

Cheers,
mackmania

Alex said:


What are the "right" reasons to enter this area of magic?

Magic is about the magician.
Mentalism is about the spectator..the spectator's thoughts, feelings and wantings.

rk

My right reasons...I want a fresh challenge... correction... I NEED a fresh challenge in my life. I desire the challenge of entertaining an audience and astounding them with bare minimal props; just me, the audience, and our minds in unison.

I am lifted beyond inspiration as I consider MR Osterlinds body of work. Inspiration may not knock twice in my life, so I must strike while the iron's hot. I also feel I can add my own creative spark to the field. Perhaps eventually inspire others?

I want to be able to pack and be ready to commute on a moments notice, with minimal worry about set up, angle worries, and prop maintenance. I want to "travel light" as my fifty year old back is not as supple as it used to be, and I simply can't physically handle my larger show any more. It wears me out.

These three reasons for me are personally very compelling. And they "work" for me.

There is an intense appeal to mentalism as it is a branch of our art that can still ocassionally be seen as real, it requires the spectators to feel the impossible as opposed to just watching it which can happen with magic and conjuring (Which I love dearly.)

I wouldn't say mentalism is any cheaper than other forms of close up performance, if I add up what I currently use it would be at least £200 close up and cabaret easily £700 if not more.

Naturally we do what is in vogue, this can be seen as being sheep but then again it is a good business move as we are giving them what they see on TV which is what they want.

However mentalism is very hard to do well as it requires thought, emotion, sincerity and intrigue. The skills of the magician can be seen without a word being mentioned howver mentalism requires communication and rapport.

Mentalism leaves (with some) the thought that it just might be real.. Think about how amazing it was when you still believed in Santa, it made Christmas magical. Mentalism done correctly can make some experience that wonder..

A.R.

Ahhh! You just said the key word...WONDER! Mentalism can supply that in abundance!

How do you make the transition from being a "magician" to a "mentalist"? Or can you offer a "magic act" and a "mental act" or can you just combine the two?

Mentalism was my first love but got more into magic because there seemed to be more work. I want to do mentalism but am not sure how to go about it. Should I start by introducing a mental routine into my stand-up magic act? And then work from there?

Thanks

Simon

Everything that I have read by those in the know has always said that it is extremely dificult to mix the two succesfully into one act. Since I have read it so very many times, I'm tending to believe it's true.

Can someone here with some knowledge or experience please comment on that?

If you believe that magic and mentalism cannot be combined effectively, you'll have to tell me that Dunninger, Kreskin, and Osterlind do not and never have existed.

Fortunately, we have some excellent videos available of Richard Osterlind performing both, and making them seem not at all opposing. In one instance, he goes so far as to say that he enjoys magic and could do a little bit of it for 'em, then proceeds to pull a hundred (?) dollar bill from the inside of a cigarette (both borrowed). Watch these DVDs closely. He never explains how he combines the two without negating anything of either magic or mentalism, so you'll have to study his style and presentation. If you want to know the "how" of this, you're going to have to spring for his books, where the secret of the differences between magic and mentalism is spelled out and the ability to do both at the same time is taught.

But taught so delicately that you might not even realize you're learnin' somethin'!

*jeep!
--Chet

I have the DVD you are speaking about, and I have viewed it up to a point...and the Bill In Cigarette caught my eye as I was reading the cover...and I was going to get to viewing it this evening..but I had some things come up unexpectedly....but I was WONDERING how what sounded for all the world like a magic effect could be included on a mentalism DVD! I simply concluded thatperhaps that he did the effect with a mentalism "slant" or presentation.

Now after reading your post I see what the case is! I can't wait to view this one!

Doug, Doug - PLEASE pick up his *Making Magic Real* trilogy (one volume at a time) so that you'll really get the intricacies of this. I'm not sure it's quite possible to communicate all that's needed in anything less than the printed word.

You will thank me for this advice.

*jeep!
--Chet

I'm thanking you right now!

Posted: Dec 5, 2005 5:56am
On Ebay their is an Osterlind book called the "Principals of magic" Is that one and the same as the one you are referring to, Chet?