|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..9~10~11 | ||||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts 
|
I'm pretty sure that Mindpro is just equating the word "performance" with a formal show, as opposed to a one-off "Can you show me something" bit.
On the other hand, I've done full shows where only a few people showed up. Did the same show as always, but when I needed more than three participants there was no one left in the audience. But I think that still qualifies as a show. |
|||||||||
insight Inner circle 3095 Posts
|
Mindpro very clearly stated that any one-on-one stuff is not a performance. I think he should clarify, because I think some of the most beautiful pieces I have performed for another person have been those in an intimate environment, without the company of others. A one-on-one performance should not disqualify it from being considered a performance.
Quote:
On May 24, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: |
|||||||||
|
sandsjr Special user 840 Posts
|
Insight, in what way does the "label" you yourself use to categorize the act (whatever you'd like to call it, performance etc.) make the act better or worse?
|
|||||||||
|
insight Inner circle 3095 Posts
|
In no way does the label make a difference whether The act is better or worse. I was just saying that there is no reason to not call a one-on-one performance just that...a performance!
quote]On May 24, 2014, sandsjr wrote: Insight, in what way does the "label" you yourself use to categorize the act (whatever you'd like to call it, performance etc.) make the act better or worse? [/quote] |
|||||||||
|
sandsjr Special user 840 Posts
|
Quote:
On May 24, 2014, insight wrote: In the words of the great Emperor Joseph II, "Well, there it is." |
|||||||||
|
swamister New user 22 Posts
|
As with most things, you can't save people from themselves - its only when they hit their own personal brick wall, or fall so hard they can't really stand back up, do they then ask for, accept and listen to the help being given...
|
|||||||||
|
Mindpro Eternal Order 10619 Posts
|
Quote:
On May 24, 2014, insight wrote: Yes, I agree with Bob's sentiments. I'm saying there is a difference from a show or performance and a demonstration or a "let me show you a little something..." The only people that think one on one is a "performance" or "show" are only those that are the person doing it. Most others simply do not. The people you are doing this to don't think of it as a performance or show, a person or venue that books this does not think of this way, only the person doing it. As an example, when someone calls me or one of my agencies and they ask for a performance, they certainly do not in any way mean a one on one situation. They want a performance or a show for their venue or group of people. If I sent them someone doing one on one they would be disappointed and livid. To them, as well as me, one on one is not a performance. If that's what they wanted they would ask for a strolling entertainer that would do continuous one on one demonstrations or 'a little somethings" for a person or two and then move on and repeat it for another. Even a one on one reader is not seen as a performance, it's seen as doing personal readings. When a buyer or laymen thinks of a performance, seeing a performance or attending a performance, I guarantee you none of them are thinking of one on one. They are thinking of a structured performance at a certain performance venue or location, and are expecting a produced or staged performance by a designated and skilled performer(s) that they know and are aware of in advance and deliberately, in which they choose to attend for the sole purpose of being entertained. A performance (and in my opinion especially mentalism other than readings) is a collective experience to be accepted and shared by an audience simultaneously with the desire and purpose of being entertained. As for qualities and elements of a "performance" it begins with the act of intentional stimulation. A shared group experience of intentional and desired stimulation on both the conscious and subconscious levels. Because they have chosen and accepted this intention, guests begin to accept the experience in desired breathing patterns, reactions, muscle tension and calculated responses. The performer is able to see and allow the journey through the eyes and senses of the audience as a whole as a heightened sense of awareness and execution. Audience members relate and identify with these actions, whether they are conscious of it or not. The experience is visceral. All of one’s senses are involved and in play. A "performance" is an intentionally created chosen participatory offering based on a shared journey by an audience creating a united experience using such elements and qualities as comedy, drama, suspense, intrigue, surprise, excitement, relief, uncertainty, mystery, laughter, fear, happiness, sadness and more between the entertainer, the performance and the audience. The performance affects one individually and the entire audience collectively both physically and psychologically. One’s senses are fully engaged and their awareness is heightened. An experience of totality that only that collective audience there at that moment can truly understand. A performance has a structured intro, opening, beginning, an emotional journey and climax, perhaps with peaks and valleys or a continuous buildup in between. This is a performance. Your comment about my beliefs and perception is disrespectful to guys like Peter Turner and Rick Ferguson (really?) is also incorrect. The work they do may be great, and may be appealing to you and other magicians or mentalists but I still would not consider it a performance. I believe Peter himself has even eluded to this himself on several occasions at least in part stating something to the effect of "these are just tools you can use..." in a performance or to create a performance. One of the greatest crimes I see here with magicians and in entertainment in general is that it is so easy to get caught up and in being an entertainer and only seeing the world through the eyes of the entertainer, that often we lose all sights and perspectives of laymen and the real outside world. In reality it is this that is most important to our success as entertainers. That's why performing for other magicians whether in person, by Skype or at conventions can be quite damaging to our overall perception and real world experience. I'm sure none of this will change your perspective (as you will likely try to twist what I've said to claim that this also can be applied to one on one "performing") as you seem to be set on all you can see from your perspective, and as I stated earlier, we will just have to agree to disagree. But I personally urge you and all others reading this to take a step back and out of your own zone to see how this is experienced by those of most importance - those that book us and our audiences. |
|||||||||
|
Jeff Wassom Elite user 493 Posts
|
Wow, extremely informative Mindpro, thanks for taking the time to elaborate.
So, would 'demonstrating' be a more fair and accurate assessment of the one-on-one and/or informal settings in question? |
|||||||||
|
sandsjr Special user 840 Posts
|
From the above posts, I believe you have a semantic argument where both are right.
Words have many shades of meaning and are in a constant state of evolution. In my own opinion, for what it's worth, I see nothing wrong for example, with the phrase, "I performed it several times in front of the mirror to see how..." At the same time I wouldn't say (after performing an effect for one person) I did a "performance" for him. And to complicate matters more, I would see nothing wrong with a friend asking if that person "enjoyed my performance" of XYZ effect! It can get tricky. :-) |
|||||||||
|
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
It really is just a semantics issue. I understand what Mindpro means and it makes sense. But that is because he is using the term "performance" as a synonym for "show." And there are still various nuances that can be given to both words depending completely on the context in which they're used.
I think the discussion is valuable, though, because it deals with the way that we communicate with each other. Here, it's pretty easy for us to figure out what is meant, but that's not always the case. For example, how many times have you heard someone here ask what they should do for their first "stage show," when, in fact, they are using the term "stage" to refer to a performance for a dozen people or so rather than just a close up show? The are very real differences between close-up, parlour, platform and stage shows, the moat important being that the latter is literally done on a "stage" (as in a theater) |
|||||||||
|
sandsjr Special user 840 Posts
|
Quote:
On May 25, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: Very good point, and serves to remind us to take a little extra time to inform and be more descriptive when we post. |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9987 Posts
|
I tend to look at such matters of miscommunication from the point of view of the observer or spectator. If the spectator expects to be entertained by something you will do, then whatever you do is a "performance." If they expect you to demonstrate some paranormal ability you may be a Mentalist. If they expect you to demonstrate defiance of some physical law you are a Conjuror/Magician/Wizard. If they do not have such an expectation, or know that you are doing something incredible "right now" then there is no "performance" or "mentalism" or "conjury."
The distinctions argued above may have some importance for Mentalists talking to Mentalists, but have little importance for creating conditions under which a spectator will expect, anticipate and be rewarded by a performance of something extraordinary. Each spectator may come away with a different story to tell - and the size of the audience has some impact on that (infectious emotion). I am not a Mentalist because I do not "perform for entertainment." I may not be a performer because in the 10,000 plus times I executed an action before an individual that most would consider "mentalism" there was no expectation that I was going to do so. Instead the response was for the observer to challenge their view of what is impossible for them -- which was my intent. (throw in 30,000 plus such interactions on the Conjury side). The point is that such terms as "mentalism," "mental magic," "performance" and even "entertainment" depend on interactive communication with the observer. These are not things inflicted on an audience by the "performer."
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
|
Mindpro Eternal Order 10619 Posts
|
Quote:
On May 25, 2014, Jeff Wassom wrote: Yes, As I stated earlier, I think demonstration is more accurate. More accurate in the reality of what he entertainer is doing, and also from the perspective of the unsuspecting person receiving this "demonstration". I also believe the deeper you delve into this and the accepted meaning of performance by most people (not entertainers) it becomes even more distinct and separated from what these one on one guys consider a "performance". As Bob stated, many around here in the community use the word much differently than is generally accepted. Besides Bob's example, how many magicians claim " I have been performing since I was 5 years old and received my first magic kit for my birthday". Again their definition of "performing" is much different than most that hear or read this on their web site or in their promo materials. A more accurate description would be "I've been practicing magic since..." or "I have been doing magic since..." You can say it's semantics, perhaps, but I also believe there is generally accepted meaning and interpretations that differs from what Mike and the one on one performers he's mentioning themselves refer to. I could never imagine doing a one on one piece or a reading and walk away thinking "man I just did a great performance". And again, it's surely not what the person you did it for thought at all. |
|||||||||
|
insight Inner circle 3095 Posts
|
Mindpro, you wrote the following: "The only people that think one on one is a "performance" or "show" are only those that are the person doing it. Most others simply do not."
I think semantics matter. In terms of what you wrote, it is not possible to say that "ONLY" performers perceive a one-on-one performance as just that (a performance), while also saying that "MOST OTHERS" do not. Those two statements contradict each other. If you think "ONLY" performers perceive a one-on-one performance as just that (a performance), then you should have stated that "ALL OTHERS" do not. The fact that you chose to write "most others" may signify that you believe some spectators may perceive a one-on-one experience as a performance. If so, this is consistent with what I have been saying all along, namely that it is POSSIBLE to have a one-on-one performance. As evidence, look no further than Peter Turner and his beautiful performances involving one person. Even if the time spent by Peter Turner is limited to one-person, it is just so beautiful, so powerful, and so uplifting of a performance. To say that it was just a "demonstration", in my opinion, does not do it justice. Regards, Mike Regards, Mike Quote:
On May 25, 2014, Mindpro wrote: |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » The Difference Between Mentalism and Mental Magic (13 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..9~10~11 | ||||||||||
Posted: May 24, 2014 05:51 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.1 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 < 
|