This is a little moan about the number of people walking around like they wanna be Derren Brown; they dress and act like him. Also another moan---to all those people who are stupid mentalists who think that all of Derren's material is original and all made up by him. That is all.

Oh, come now. People are inspired about a mentalist that has had some T.V. coverage, well that’s wonderful isn’t it? The more inspiration, the more people move into it, the more they find their own voice and style, the more they discover about originators and history, the more artists and developers emerge.

It takes time. Everyone has had their inspirations that started them out, just as surely as people love to bash popular figures and their admirers, because there is some imitation and a feeling that they take all the credit.

In Derren’s case, I think what could be truly sad is if some of the genuine contributions and reflections on the art (rather than any effect) are devalued because of his popular status.

Nick.

Inspiration? Sure, a great thing. Copying is not and does not lead to "finding their own voice".

It does no good either to them (they will always be almost as good as who they are copying but never as good or better) or others.

Why is it a good thing to have many mentalists? You have a lot of magicians now, and do you think it has done any good to the image of magic in the eyes of the public?

Couldn't agree more, Kenguru

You'll find numerous tirades from me in this section about poor magicians who think adding a couple of mental effects will make up for their lack of ability to entertain.

The sooner mentalism ceases to be trendy the better as far as I'm concerned.

Doug

There are a lot of angry people out there...

Alex,

Just because other people are getting interested in 'your' hobby does not make it a bad thing.

I am sure the performers that have inspired you to get into the hobby aren't upset by the fact that you probably can't perform the effects as well as them.

People will always copy people, and occasionally you will get someone original come out of the woodwork or 'worse' someone who makes a success and then gets attacked by people who are jealous of their success. Human beings are wonderful people, as long as they don't think you are getting something that they think they should be getting.

Personally, Derren Brown made me realise that mentalists were not failed magicians who were unable to handle the complex work that goes into learning sleights, and I am glad that he piqued my interest in this fascinating subject.

P.S. I neither dress like him or perform like him...

Doug,

If you are an active performer the surge in popularity should be beneficial to your business. When it ceases to be trendy, you will have to learn something else.

Are you sure? You’ve never copied anyone, on any level, never stood on the backs of any of the giants? Actually imitation is a fine thing that people go through in the creative process of learning and it would be an impoverished world if it weren’t so. It’s a word merely with bad connotations for many people.



Why? Because people who get to see a great live Mentalist show are in a tiny, tiny minority. And, if the traditions of magic and mentalism can endure through the MTV and Playstation generation(s), then I think it a worthy thing.

The idea that we all will be swamped with mentalists in our theatre houses and bars is just one irrational fear.

Nick.

Mr. Cahill, I have seen you perform a number of times, as well as your recently very inspirational lecture in Bradford. I have to admit that I attempt to incorporate some of your unique flair into my own performance.

o, I'm not trying to massage your ego, but you may now understand that gaining inspiration from others is not that bad. If you take offence to me incorporating facets of your style into my own act, then you are, perhaps, not quite as slick as many of us at this Café think you are.

When I was a teenager, role models in magic were important to me. My heroes were Penn and Teller and Ricky Jay.

I wanted to be like them, but found that part of their attraction was their individuality, which naturally made me interested in developing a sense of character.

I firmly believe it's part of the learning process, like bands playing cover versions. Everyone has to start somewhere, and your ideal of a good magician hinges on who you're exposed to.

The more magicians out there the chance will be higher that some of them will be good. It's the rule of numbers.

...But for every increase in good magicians there is an increase in bad. I'd suggest that if something is popular then it becomes easier to become involved and therefore less dedication is required to find out more. Therefore, I think more magicians equals a higher percentage of bad ones.

Nick:

I do not copy/imitate. I do stand (sometimes) on the shoulders of others, but it does not show when I perform an effect. I don't look act/dress/perform like someone else. It is an internal hidden process. That is inspiration. I too had/have my heroes, and they inspire me. I never imitate them.

Imitation is not fine, and it is not just a word with a bad connotation. It actually means something else than inspiration. In my experience most people do not get pass imitating but rather stay stuck at such a level. It does them not good. I am not even talking about the intellectual property rights they violate by copying some else's performance.

Nicholas:

I agree. I find that when something becomes popular the percentage of good actually shrinks (not just in our field). I think everyone has the right to perform and even perform badly, but not to copy badly (or well for that matter) someone else.

What do people think of the name Jeff mc Copperfield or Daryl Ammar?

Alex,

If I understand you correctly you think that Daryl is imitating Ammar and that McBride is imitating Copperfield. Is that your point?

No, not my point at all. All are great performers, but I am thinking of changing my name. Which one to you think? I quite like Lance Blaine.

How about Derren Houdin ?

Kenguru,

I do agree with what you say about how it seems most people get stuck on the level of imitating and that is not a great thing to be stuck. I would certainly not like to pay to see any performer(s) who haven’t made it their own---or at least weren't making strong strides in that direction.

However, the idea that when people start out they must *not* imitate anyone...that they must be able to find *immediately* their own unique style with no influence or dare I say, copying or outside help is not how it happens IMO. With many of the truly great performers, musicians, painters and other artists throughout history, if you look at their early work there is discernible, marked imitation with their growing inspiration (I have not and do not equate those two). When they have found their own unique creative capability all those influences are often still visible too in the more subtle way I suggested and that you describe. Is that such a bad thing?

Basically, I think when people learn on a grassroots level, it starts out a very coarse process and gradually and finally ends up being much more refined; maybe I choose to believe that it isn’t necessarily a bad thing, far from it, and is part of a natural process that’s always happened here.

Nick.

Go for (the amazing) Derrini.

Nick,

I agree that this is the way it happens a lot of the time. I just think it is a bad thing for the imitating performer and morally wrong. I think that even a beginner can and should be creative and inspired but not copy others. I don't think you have to have a lot of experience in order to do things you own way and not copy some else.

Kenguru,

I have to disagree with you. Beginners should imitate to some degree. You can't expect a beginner to come up with everything you might achieved in years. Try reading Whit Haydn's article against originality in magic. It applies to mentalism as well.

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......7&27

Nir

I agree that if someone had purchased a published work of another, it gives him a right to perform it (unless restricted by the originator/publisher). I also agree that any beginner would probably do well to study the classics.

I still think that he should be original, and I would not advise a beginner today to start performing the classics the way they were performed by their originators. I would instead advise them to make a new and contemporary interpretation of the classic effect. There are exceptions, of course, but with all due respect (and it is due), I disagree with Mr. Haydn.

Again all this only in case the effect/performance has been published and the imitator did purchase it. As far as I know, Derren Brown (referring to the first post here) did not publish his current workings/performance or gave anyone permission to imitate it.

He has published two books and a video (International Magic also published a lecture by him), and although he speaks and writes about things that he thinks are important, nowhere in these publications did I find any permission to imitate him or use his unique character (or for that matter, most of the effects he does and is famous of).