Sorry for the all caps. I cut and pasted.

Is this a good book for learning the methods that the mediums used back in the day?

Thanks!

It's more of a history book than a "how to do it" guide but it is useful and well-written. I wrote a few detailed review a few years ago; please PM me your E-mail address if you'd like a copy (I'll need to do some editing). It's part of my AIMC thesis which you can also find on the Magic Circle and Psycrets websites (members' areas).

Barry

Apology in advance if you a Harry fan, I'm not and by no means do I intend this post to offend.

Below are just some of the early books about spiritualism that I would rather read than read that piece of trash written by Houdini again. Which is one of the worst book ever written on the subject IMO. Real shame it has become a bible of spiritualism which is kinda of funny and other story altogether. I will even explain why just about everything contained in that work is completely out of context and most of the methodologies described there in no spiritualist would ever use, first many of those methods contained therein are far to complex. Because many of the methods contained therein were crafted by magicians. These magicians were only posing as spiritualist to make money as this industry was all the rage at the time and highly profitable regardless of the moral mischief that was going on. The proof. Some of these people were sort of well known magicians of the time can be seen assisting the female medium whom were part of their act. Here is the key. Look at the mediums photos find the ones with pictures of male assistants then find those photos of those guys in early issues of the IBM and other early magic publications. Its all there if you look. Many of the works or so called secrets that Houdini reveals for the first time were in fact first discovered by Robert Gysel shortly prior to Harry's publication and published in letters, most of these letter were sent out to many magicians. Some of these typed and hand written letter still survive in private collections to this day. Gysel would later head the IBM Fraud investigation group until he was tossed out of the IBM. That’s a long and dark tale.

Here are just some of the ten thousand or so books written on the subject. Each work listed below was written by known spiritualist of there day. While these books do not clearly come out and reveal effect the premise of these effect are there hidden within some of these pages. I must admit some of this stuff while interesting from a historical perspective is a bit dry and windy.

Key to Ghostism by Rev. Thomas Mitchell 1880

Leaves from a Psychist’s Case-Book by Harry Price 1933

Margery the Medium by J. Malcolm Bird 1925

New Light on Old Ghosts by Trevor Hall 1965

The Preliminary Report of the Commission…to Investigate Modern Spiritualism by Henry Seybert 1920

Seen and unseen by E. Katharine Bates 1908

Allan Kardac (Léon-Dénizarth-Hippolyte Rivail) all first written prior to1869
The Spirits' Book
The Mediums Book
The Gospel According to Spiritism
Heven And Hell
The Genessis According to Spiritism
Chico Xavier
Francisco Cândido Xavier (April 2, 1910 - June 30, 2002) Brazilian write who authored more than 400 books on the subject and whom personally more than 10000 letter to people who suffered a loss.
Its strange stuff but interesting, Some of his works have been translated to english.

Léon Denis: All written prior to his death in 1927
“Christianity and Spiritism;
“Here and Hereafter);
“Spirits and Mediums;
“Joan of Arc;
“In the Invisible;
“The Beyond and the Survival of the Being;
“Spiritism and the Catholic Clergy;
“Spiritism in the Art;
“The Celtic Genius and the Invisible World;
“The Great Enigma;
“The Invisible World and the War;
“The Reason of Life;
“Life and Destiny;
“Progress;
“Experimental tests of the Survival;
“Socialism and Spiritism.”

and then there is Andrew Jackson Davis and Hudson Tuttle. Both are recommend. The Andrew Jackson Davis work predates the Fox sister events in New York. This book was also know to be read by one of the sisters although finding out that information is not an easy task. You also may wish to look at some of the writings by Manly P Hall.
Lastly, in séance work context is everything without proper construction of the context or premiss for this type of work all you have is a string of meaning less effects. Remember in this sort of work the waiting around for something to happen is where the build up is and often where the real magic is but that's a bit harder to explain. In this style of performance less is more.

I would like to add to the previous list, "Sixty Years of Psychical Research" by Joseph F. Rinn. I realize that many magicians have come to idealize Houdini and the myth he created around himself. He certainly was fantastic at publicity and advertising. But was he as good as he claimed? Perhaps not. In Rinn's book, Rinn clearly states what was going on. Houdini would reveal the very obvious frauds (as publicity for his shows), but when it came to the real work, he would often call on Rinn. There's even the possibility that Houdini committed fraud in his "exposure" of "Margery."

Houdini had been the top vaudeville act of his day. He could have made far more money, but he just didn't think anyone was worth more than he demanded for shows, another reason he was so popular. But by the time he started exposing fake mediums, his career was waning and he used his exposures primarily as publicity, not because he was actually trying to contact the spirit of his mother as the myth has led so many to believe.

I believe you are 100% on this. Many folks today set up "Straw Men" in their lectures and then burn them down while claiming ..."See, it's all a fake!" while the rubes never even get to see "The Real Thing" at all.

Just to clarify my late night/early morning post, when I wrote, "He could have made far more money, but he just didn't think anyone was worth more than he demanded for shows, another reason he was so popular" I did not mean to imply that he was popular TO AUDIENCES because he was relatively inexpensive. Rather, he was popular to those who ran the theaters because they could make so much money off of him. As a result, he could be constantly booked and by touring everywhere he increased his visibility resulting in more popularity with audiences.

For his time, his marketing, publicity, and advertising were second to none. One author even pointed out that he anticipated the kinky sex market by more than half a century! (A fit guy coming out wearing a small swimsuit and locked in chains. Hmmm.) Genius, yes. He made his name synonymous with "magic." How many young magicians today add "i" or "ini" after their names? But was he the best magician? Blackstone didn't think so, and was forever ticked off that Houdini got more credit than he did. He must have hated their co-written book. There were better coin handlers then (Al Flosso, for one), and there may have been better card handlers then, too. He was probably the best escape artist of his time. But is being an escape artist the same as being a magician? Certainly it is an allied field, but so is juggling, perhaps more so. Many magicians of 100-300 years ago used to call themselves "Jugglers." Today, however, I don't know of anyone who mistakes a juggler for being a magician.