If we move away from our little world of mentalism then we will see that we have to suffer like all other people who are living in the rest of our world and are still using their trained and educated brain... It seems to be in the spirit of our current time to believe that each fart is of interest for the rest of the world. Look at facebook, instagram a. s. o.

I remember times when you needed effort, work, success and achievement before going public. But going public today seems defined already as success, just going public without having achieved anything before. The act itself of going public is the performance. So I do not wonder that this reflects in our little community.

If I have to explain to my kids already (and I do so!) the difference between a photo of myself on facebook (after a show, or advertising a performance I was working hard for...) and a photo of a young girl staying in bikini in her garden (having done nothing at all until now in the sense of achievement, not even able to put three correctly spelled words under her photo...) then I start to understand the new spirit - which will never be my spirit. Jan

Well said, Iain. In Christopher Taylor's recent release, Hotel, he talks about the history of one of the methods used in the routine, who the inventor was, how he discussed and obtained permission to teach the method, and provides full credit to the inventor of the method. This is obviously the right way to go about presenting a new routine that uses, in part, another creator's work. Permission first, credit second. And in the process, teach and preserve the history of the invention.

Real learning happens far from the message boards. It happens from master to student and in the real world of performance and hard knocks.

Sorry, I was trying to make the same point as Jan, but not as eloquently.

I meant that the trivialisation of keeping secrets and the de-valuing of Mentalism material with the rush of poorly thought out offerings, prevalent in most forums, is a major contributor to poorly credited work.

Of course I agree that work should be properly credited, but in our rush to find the new Messiah (or to be him/her) people are over eager to consume and not willing enough to have that background knowledge.

How many people in this forum do you actually think have 'read' Corinda and Annemann? I would 'predict' that it is less than have obtained Peter Turner's work. That is not meant to be a contentious statement or a reflection of Peter's material, but my honest opinion of the zeitgeist of public forums.

... Which is the same as agreeing with Iain, but offering a perspective of 'why'.

Let love and friendship reign.

Very cogent thoughts, Iain, Methinks part of the problem is the modern tendency to confuse available "facts/data" with knowledge.
Even then, knowing "what" is never the same as "knowing how" or "why."

It isn't just Mentalism being trivialized, it is the concept of how to acquire knowledge as opposed to accumulating information.

In the 70's a pundit quipped on the entropy of learning ...

"Eventually we will describe more and more about less and less until we know everything about nothing, and nothing about anything."

I enjoyed your post, Iain. Intelligent and perceptive.

Many people seem to be caught up in a headlong rush to get "stuff." That notion is based on the tragic assumption that props make the performer.

The real issue I think is that people have quit asking themselves "why?" Why am I learning this? Why am I intrigued by it? Why does it fit me as a performer?

The Internet has made information easy to get. In the olden days you really had to work to get secrets. They had value. They were traded like gold and occasionally given as gifts. Now with so many resources available and so many people saying so many things the perception is that information has become cheap. That's why some guys can come on here and talk about how Corinda and Annemann are outdated. They don't know what they're talking about because...well...they don't know what they're talking about.

How many people know or care about Eddie Fields and the brilliant idea he had? (If he hadn't created what he created I would probably be doing something very different with my life today.) How many care about Grant or Hoy or...well the pantheon of people who have gone before? When did they become irrelevant?

So you struck a nerve with this post, Iain. Thank you.

David

Hey AJ, You almost had it, and the aggressive helpfulness shut you down.
The metaphor you're reaching for is The Human Centipede.
Which is great, because we'll never be hungry for ideas, and it doesn't hurt to identify what we're consuming.

d

AHEM!

I've just been thinking over all this, and I think I've come up with a good analogy for this: It's like a human centipede.

I am publishing a brand new analogy soon. PM if you want to pre-order.

I can't reveal everything but it's called The Human Millipede

Is it propless?

Let's just say it's 1,000 times better than the old analogy.

Welcome to the world of Modern Mentalism!

You know that old Zen proverb "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear?"
Well, I experienced something of the sort, this past summer.
I had been in the process of researching the history of one of the components of a new effect that I am soon to release. I wanted to ensure proper crediting and had a few loose ends.
It was a bit of a challenge to try to track every lead down.

For reasons quite separate from the project, I found myself in the kitchen of the hospitality suite of a convention, grabbing a beverage, when in walked Max Maven.
After some social chit-chat I asked:
"Would you mind if I picked your brain?"

What followed was the uncorking of over an hour of extraordinary knowledge.
I'd always known that the man has an encyclopedic mind, but to experience it, in this manner, made me realize just how frail a resource infrastructure we have in our community (which is not to say that Max is, in any way frail!).
Sure there are books to read, and the internet to Google, but the combination of a diminishing number of people like Max and less and les of an apparent interest in bringing this information forward, is troubling.

We went on to discuss the issue of crediting, and how, as a community, we seem to have lost the thread on recognizing the shoulder's upon which we stand.

I then showed him my brand new, original, effect "Desired." (different because I added the 'd')

e

I've had a bit of an inside out education, I started as a bizarrist, but didn't know anything about magic or mentalism, or bizarrism...i just liked writing short, weird stories and always enjoyed collecting unusual objects too...so though I was aware of magic, didn't really have much of a clue about what was mentalism really (some would say I still don't)...so the first online place I found was a bizarrist (blackhart's) site...so going from that, to card magic and hating pretty much all the plots,then being disappointed in 13 steps and kinda realised there and then that I was out of my depth...so I put it all away and restarted...i have always loved "old" and always loved books...

my major love was/is music too - playing it, teaching it at one point, being in bands, then running clubs, booking the bands, promotion, dj'ing - I have a near maven like knowledge of the music that I love...so I applied my nerdy sensibilities in researching the bands and albums, to mentalism, magic and bizarrism...

there was certainly elements of all three that I really disliked, but learnt anyway - but never felt fully comfortable to the degree that I was after...i still suffer from a bit of shotgun mindset, intense focus and then lots of messiness...so I knew pretty early on, I wasn't suited to trying to go pro (though I did have a plan, which I shelved due to family stuff going on) - so looking back, that was for the best...

so I spent a whole lot of time, digging around on sites like these, library research, second hand book shops, charity shops, and online in general, making lists and taking names and creating my own little set of bookmarks and word docs of all the leads I could find that were either highly rated, talked about unusual things that I was naturally drawn to, and all things in between... because I also have a love for the victorian period, I read a whole load of science and philosophy and spiritual books from that era and onwards...as well as authors and tracing their influences...

to use the music analogy, I really loved Small Faces, I remember them saying about their influences, and Marriott said "all we wanted to be was Booker T and the MGs" - so I dug into Booker adn the rest, the record label, and who they played with...and on and on it spread... then when you see the link between Rod Stewart and Steampacket and SMall Faces, which also meant Driscoll and Auger - which in turn meant Indian Rope Man - which leads you to Richie Havens, High Flying Bird and his appearance on uk tv, then Woodstock - his playing technique and then weird guitar tunings, you learn about Burt Jansch, english folk, and a whole lot more...

sorry...

so I spent years tracking down unsual and hard to find mentalism booklets, just because that appeals to me, I love the look and feel of them, with their bad illustrations, their dodgy photos...but sometimes amazing presentations and mad methods...

these things pulled in all kinds of directions - and you laugh at how a lot of them complain about the same thing we complain about today - bloody magicians, people not researching things before releasing them, and also how the majority of those releasing stuff were not full time pro's...

then there's the whole lecture and demonstrations angle, which are a little like the TED talk and motivational stuff we see in the past decade or so...each decade or so saying "doing it that way is old hat...", and we also see the endless versions of the same classics...with only minor modifications...

i think a journey of discovery is good for the mind, it encourages strong visualisation skills, creativity, researching, thinking for yourself, all those good things...its that kinda thing that helps build up your mentalism education in my opinion...

this place isn't the beginning or the end of mentalism, nor are the opinions shared either...however, to take the postiives out of such a huge interactive, digital library full of all kinds of opinions - you'd be silly not to use it in an intelligent way...

we talk of annemann, but sometimes no real specifics, no Incorporated Strange Secrets...track down an original copy and hold it...it means something, it does to me...

grabbing at my bookshelf - the law of psychic phenomena, Thomson Jay HUdson - 1903, Minds in Clos Up - jack yates, Million Dollar Pieces of Cardboard By Fogel...all kinds of stuff, it truly starts to build up the history of things (even if you disagree with the contents) - buying the second hand copies evokes so many things...it makes it real to me...other people owning these books and learning from them...there's something about it...

having a good education on something is never something to be ashamed of...because if you have one, when something new comes out, you can stop and think "right, well...i can already do xyz, is this going to offer me something different/better/refined?"...and if its not...save your money and buy old books instead...

The best secrets are.....the old days are still here with many of us....

Eric touched on the key above. Yes, giving proper credit and reference is the least that should be done. However to properly appreciate the evolution of our field, it needs to go beyond the usual " this effect derives from Samuels effect called " Xxx" , which developed it from Horawitz effect "Xxx". And I am sure Eric's hours with Max went way beyond that. It needs a more developed history. Using my lame fictitious example, " Horowitz first developed the concept by < explicit discussion of concept and method > , Samuels took this effect and developed it < again explicit discussion of thoughts on improvement, etc and method >, which bring us to ......."

I find a minority of authors who take this approach and truly appreciate it. Understanding that it takes a lot of knowledge, time, and space (pages) to develop it this way, even before getting to the subject product ( book, effect, etc) . Not always appreciated by he impatient reader. The balance is how to do this and not cross into inappropriate exposure, especially in forum context. Easier to accomplish in person, production, or publication.

It's a worry, and seen all too often around these parts. Someone could, for instance, rehash an old principle like a gimmicked pad or something and claim its the first time it's been seen, and if you haven't done your research you might believe them.

A big part of the problem is that consumers do not always care whether proper crediting has been done or whether a principle is new or if a release is innovative in any way. To the credit of the pads example above, the history and use of the principle was extremely well documented.

What is amazing to me is that there are creators who blatantly churn out effect after effect in which their version is based upon such a minute difference over the original as to be tantamount to theft - especially as they teach within their product the ingenious core method which belongs to another - and they are subsequently afforded a modicum of respect by those who don't know enough to know better.

I don't know that there is any solution to this current conundrum apart from trusting that as the novice delves deeper into mentalism, their level of respect for the art will elevate their sense of honor and duty toward it, and that this will be reflected in their subsequent actions.

Best,

Atlas