We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Straight-Forward Spectator Mind Reading (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

MikeJRogers
View Profile
Veteran user
Australia
354 Posts

Profile of MikeJRogers
Hi there everyone,

Just lately I've seen a few performers perform some very straight-forward mind reading. The effects involved a spectator thinking of a number or a name or a card, etc., and the performer would name it straight out or reveal it in a spectacular way---e.g., written in ash on the performer's body or something.

I've been doing magic for quiet some time now, but have never learnt and/or performed many mentalism effects. However, I'm very interested in learning how to perform the sorts of effects I mentioned above.

Could anyone help me out? Any books or DVD's you might like to suggest? I'm complete newbie when it comes to this branch of magic, so I'd really appreciate your help.

Thanks,

Mike J Rogers
Mike Rogers Illusion Design - Australia - http://www.mikerogers.com.au
"Nothings impossible, the impossible just takes longer" - Dan Brown novel
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Scott Xavier
View Profile
Inner circle
3672 Posts

Profile of Scott Xavier
I would contact master Obi Want. That's the only way to do it.

Pick up Corinda's 13 steps to mentalism.

And find out what pre-show means.
Karswell
View Profile
Regular user
156 Posts

Profile of Karswell
There are card forces in Docc Hilford's Real Mind Reading, Derren Brown's The Devils Picturebook and his book Pure Effect.

Banachek's wonderful book Psychological Subtleties has card and number subtle forces and much more. There are many ways to skin a cat, though.

Revealing them in ash, IMO, would take the sting out of any mentalist effect, unless you feel you could get away with some spontaneous manifestation of ectoplasm!
Suffolk
View Profile
Veteran user
400 Posts

Profile of Suffolk
Mike,

If you are based in Australia then have a word with Sean Taylor of Taylors Magic.

If you promise solemnly that you'll only either perform mental magic as part of your magic act or only mentalism in a mentalism act, I'll happily give you Sean's details and lots of other help. But, and this is contentious, I am very, very unhappy and concerned with the amount of magicians on the Magic Café who see a mentalist effect and think "I'd like to do that".

You can't. That's not what your character does. You're a magician, not a mind reader/psychic/whatever.

Remember people do not pay to see us perform an effect (or, God help us, a trick); they pay to be entertained. Some entertainers are dancers, some are actors, some are contortionists, but they are discrete acts. I can sing, act and juggle, but when I'm my mentalist stage persona I can't do any of those things, nor can I make doves appear, levitate or (in my instance) bend metal, even though doing those things are often a lot easier than what I actually do.

So if "I'd like to do that in my magic act" is your current thought process, then go away and look for some "great new sleights" in the cardician section. But if you want to develop a new act as a mentalist, I'd be delighted to help. PM me when you've made up your mind.

Doug
tboehnlein
View Profile
Inner circle
ohio
1783 Posts

Profile of tboehnlein
Doug, in the past I was a very strong believer in separating mentalism from magic and have previously always followed that belief. However, I just finished reading Ken Weber's Maximum Entertainment, and he initiates a very simple ideal in that does the audience really differentiate between mentalism, magic or mental magic, or does it only care about being entertained? Like I said, haven't changed the act but something to ponder.
Suffolk
View Profile
Veteran user
400 Posts

Profile of Suffolk
I agree (this is an excellent book that every magical entertainer should be forced to read in the same way drivers have to read the Highway Code) the audience does not discern between the two, but they will notice an act that doesn't hold together well because it's a jumble of styles and the performer doesn't know who he/she is. However, the two points I was making were:

a) Seldom can a performer mix two different art forms and still be a good performer. I would direct you to soap stars releasing albums as an example (yes, I know about Kylie, but she didn't become credible as a singer until after she quit acting Q.E.D).

b) I am not in anyway implying that Mike is one of these, but there are an enormous amount of posts on here from magicians who are spending more time and effort "effect hunting" that they are developing the entertainment quotient of their act.

Mentalism has suddenly become hot again (largely due to a bearded Bristonan), and guess what? Every Johnny-I-can-do-every-slight-you-name-but-I-can't-entertain wants to add a Brownesqean effect to what they jokingly refer to as their act.

Sorry if I seem a bit forthright, but it drives me mad.
tboehnlein
View Profile
Inner circle
ohio
1783 Posts

Profile of tboehnlein
No problem, Doug. Like I said, Weber just gives us something to ponder, and pondering is far superb to accepting something blindly. I believe even if others only ponder the thought of mixing magic and mentalism they will be far better off.
Alan Munro
View Profile
Inner circle
Kentwood, Michigan, USA
5771 Posts

Profile of Alan Munro
I've seen Bill Goldman work on a number of occasions, and his stuff is amazing. His level of success speaks for itself, if you define it in financial terms.

He performs a revelation of a thought-of card and he markets "Mental Yarn", which I perform in my stand-up act and while strolling. His site is http://www.bgmagic.com/
Suffolk
View Profile
Veteran user
400 Posts

Profile of Suffolk
Quote:
On 2004-02-28 02:47, Alan Munro wrote:
I've seen Bill Goldman work on a number of occasions, and his stuff is amazing. His level of success speaks for itself, if you define it in financial terms.


Interesting point, while I think Bill Goldman's stuff is very good, what I think bears more examination is if financial success should be a critiea by which you judge a performers material?

I'm not sure where I stand on that but a thought to kick start a discussion:

Has "Run Rabbit Run" generated more £'s/$'s than say Banachek's PK Time?.......
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Straight-Forward Spectator Mind Reading (0 Likes)
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.15 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL