|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
January Veteran user 390 Posts |
Interesting, Mindpro. Do you mind elaborating? I'm just curious since most of this seems to be pretty oldschool stuff: Annemann, Corinda, Osterlind, Cassidy, a lot of billet work (e.g. Switchcraft).
My impression--keep in mind I'm relatively new--was that that the "new wave" of mentalism was the school that gravitated toward 100% impromptu, propless, d**l r**lity, one-on-one street/parlor/bar mentalism, instead of the more stage-friendly approaches mentioned above that are based on billet work and other more traditional approaches. For example, I perceive Peter Turner as one who falls roughly into that "new wave" category (not saying he can't do the stage as well, but just that he has a lot of nice parlor and one-on-one effects), while someone like Cassidy or Osterlind is more a direct descendant using the basic tools of the classics of Annemann and Corinda, just refined and honed to perfection. |
|||||||||
Mindpro Eternal Order 10585 Posts |
Sure I'll elaborate a bit more.
I agree with your perceptions of mentioned in the above post. The point of mentalism for years (generations actually) was in the foundational aspects, the mentalities, understandings and the differences from magic, both in execution and perception). It was why Bob created the guide he did, and it's why most others would rarely ever mention "effects" as a starting point. No one would ever mention Switchcraft or Psycholigical Subleties (with no disrespect to Elliot or Banachek). Even these guys would likely say, these are not a starting point. But look at what most offered - effects and certain works of others. Then those that are essentially saying "just do it" which a very magicians, out of the box mentality. It's no wonder we have a generation of magicians claiming they're doing mentalism. What I have found to be true consistently, over and over again, is these newer guys tend to listen to the "effects" or "just do it guys" as it aligns with their interest and fantasies. Yet I guarantee you they will be seen only as tricks. Some will be content with that. Some won't understand why, others will probe deeper into the understanding of the ACCEPTANCE OF MENTALISM (not the performance of mentalism) to realize some foundational choices and decisions have to be made. They delve further into this, become quite confused or even more confused, and hit a wall. Of course many then will fall to today's current default position of the "well I am not psychic, I use body language, NLP and psychological techniques....." so they can avoid the "psychic" connection to mentalism, and in the end they settle for magic mentalism or mentalism-lite, all because of who and what they chose to listen to in the beginning, not to have been able to establish who's advice or position they were listening to and the path that doing so has lead them. Most here are NOT teachers, they are opinion-offerers. That is not who you should be listening to at the point of beginning and learning. Those that properly break this all down into easy to understandable and digestable steps and segments, IN THE PROPER ORDER are who and what they should be seeking, listening to, being directed toward and being advised to so. It plays out the same over and over again. We see it here every day. It is what has caused Bob (long before his current condition) and so many pros to stop contributing here or being present. I could go on, but won't, but hopefully that fulfilled your interest to elaborate. |
|||||||||
January Veteran user 390 Posts |
That is very helpful, mindpro! I think I agree with you mostly, even though you'll see posts from me mere weeks ago that probably expressed different sentiments. The forum is for me sort of a card catalog to the library of work out there. It is useful for looking up things, but Cassidy's Steps was sort of my starting point on this journey, and he was the most influential person for me in developing my mentalism.
I have to also add that one book that helped me get a good idea of magic as a whole, and mentalism's place alongside it, was Magic in Theory: An Introduction to the Theoretical and Psychological Elements of Conjuring by Lamont and Wiseman. Reading works like this really helped me to understand the structure and history of magic and mentalism little bit better. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
I can't speak for Mindpro, but I'm sure that I could probably point out some of those differences.
For starters, Mentalism has more traditionally focused primarily on stage performances (as you have noted) January. I have been a "worker" for a very long time, and I can tell you that the market has changed. Most people do not go theaters these days to watch this type of entertainment, unless of course, your name happens to be Derren Brown. There are a few others that can I can think of that are also in Derren's category as well, but the list is very short. There are other venues too such as college campuses and also company functions or tradeshows etc. But there are a lot of people getting into this who don't have the inclination to be a stage performer, and let's be honest - it really is far easier to find work in close-up environments. Additionally, some people don't even have the intention of EVER performing professionally. In some ways, I feel that a shift is happening in Mentalism much as it did with Magic when Magicians began to realize it was time to shed the typical "top hat and tails" imagery that had been so pervasive for so long. The world has changed quite a great deal in the last 20 years especially. People have far shorter attention spans nowadays as well, so it only makes sense that more personal and "close quarters" performances have become more prevalent. I feel too that there are some in Mentalism who fear this change. For this reason, it seems that almost too much information is thrown at beginners - to the point of being discouraging and overwhelming. Whether that is deliberately engineered or just a byproduct of trying to be helpful, I'm not sure. But the fact of the matter is there is no mystical secret highway and no golden road to become proficient other than to get out there and just do it. Considering that this is a field that requires you to work with people, I would say that this of paramount importance. As I have stated before, yes, you will make mistakes, but that is HOW you learn. If you truly care about what you are doing, you will analyze and think about your development and you begin to understand what things need studying next as you progress. It all comes with time. So you add things to your knowledge base as you go. There is still no better way to learn in my opinion. All the studying in the world will help you to prepare for real world performances, but there is a world of difference between understanding music theory and actually being able to play an instrument and then playing said instrument in front of an audience - to use an analogy. I know I have only scratched the surface here, but perhaps there are a few others who might want to chime in with their thoughts on the subject and we'll see where this goes. I'm sure I can't be the only one thinking this way. |
|||||||||
Robb Inner circle 1291 Posts |
MindPro makes some good points and it's true that those coming from magic have a long road to travel before they get how mentalism is different than magic. Too much emphasis is placed on methods and tricks. As a result. the vast majority of performers out there calling themselves mentalists are performing mental magic at best, not mentalism. The theatrical context of mentalism is very different from magic, although there are some similarities of course.
What's interesting to me is that I have always done mentalism exclusively, but even then I started out with more of a magicians mentality because much of the mentalism I had seen on TV as a kid was still mental magic most of the time (with few exceptions). With no real model to go by, it took me years for to get it, what makes mentalism unique. Heck, I'm still learning more everyday. |
|||||||||
Mindpro Eternal Order 10585 Posts |
See, this then become some of the dangers to asking this type of a question. The more people delve into it, the more layers come into play. It is great for discussion purposes, but will likely only confuse and derail the OP and their original interests and topics.
The reason I didn't go any further is because of where it can go next (and the misinterpretation of many here every time it does). The stage vs. closeup thing, quickly becomes a territorial thing. The sentiment, "people do not go to theaters to watch these things" is one's opinion but greatly depends on where you are located. Mentalism has long been best performed on a theater or banquet venue for an audience and collective and maximum impact. The Europeans today favor more closeup, intimate and an attempt to be more personal. This take sit away from it's strongest established and ideal position (often times running the risk of reducing it down to poorly executed appearing as a bar-trick at best). It's not right or wrong, but simply where it had been taken. So the way one responds to a question like the OPs and the way one personally sees mentalism is based again, on these very foundational elements. I still see the the majority of mentalism 80-90% in theaters, on stages or in banquet settings of large audiences. Of course this observation and experience would be different if you were chiming in from the UK. This of course affects the advice, perceptions, interests, opinions and information seen and offered on the topic. It s also the thing that has lead to the magic-turned mentalist, and the great differences between the two, as well as the way the public sees and experiences mentalism. As I said, this can easily go off in deeper and more layered directions but for the purpose of the OP and his interests shouldn't really go there. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Mindpro, I can appreciate what you're saying. I feel a discussion on these issues may ACTUALLY be of benefit to the OP. I have some strong opinions (as do most of us) on the subject, and so I will try to articulate them as best as I can while trying to be careful and considerate as I don't wish for this to become a heated debate. I am not the final authority by any means on the subject just as much as others aren't either. I also have a bad habit of assuming that some things are obvious and skip ahead without further elaboration, so please forgive me if I have not made my points more easier to understand.
I think you've misinterpreted what I meant when I wrote "Most people do not go to theaters these days to watch this type of entertainment." I simply meant that in the cities I have lived (where there are many numerous theaters) let me tell you how many Mentalists we've had: ONE. - Kreskin. And that was a long time ago. People just don't say "Gee, wanna go to see a Mentalist on Friday at the theater?" This doesn't really happen unless your name is Derren Brown or Marc Salem. People here go to the theaters mostly to see live music, plays, and occasionally, big name Comedians etc. Mentalists are a rarity. And even plays are not quite as popular as they used to be either. Robb states: "it's true that those coming from magic have a long road to travel before they get how mentalism is different than magic. Too much emphasis is placed on methods and tricks. As a result, the vast majority of performers out there calling themselves mentalists are performing mental magic at best, not mentalism. The theatrical context of mentalism is very different from magic, although there are some similarities of course." I must strongly disagree with that first sentence. There is no "long road to travel" before there can be an understanding of how they are different. That makes no sense to somebody with a theatrical background. It is only the theatrical context that is different and that's it. How is that hard to understand? There is no mystical or long road to "understand" this, in my opinion. This is also a part of the reason why I advocate watching other performers. And yes, there is a focus on effects and methods by most who come from a Magician background. I can't speak for others, but it is simply because I notice that Mentalism is severely lacking in some areas with most of the performers I've seen. I understand that many in the field view it as more "sophisticated", and in many ways it is, but there is simply not a lot of "wow" factor or "surprise" factor in most mentalists' shows that I have watched. A lot of them tend to be very tedious and horribly boring, consisting of patter themes that are tired and worn, and in many cases, presumptuous and pompous. I recently shared a new development with the folks here that has been making a big splash, and the main reason it is doing so is because it allows you to introduce SURPRISE into the effect, all the while adhering to the stringent conditions of "pure" Mentalism. If you take a well-versed magician who has whole-heartedly switched over to Mentalism and put him beside a Mentalist who has studied only Mentalism and give them the same plot to work on...I am willing to bet that the former Magician's solutions will be stronger and more impactful than the Mentalists because his knowledge base of methods is far wider. So why knock innovation? And let's not forget either that Derren Brown is an extremely accomplished Magician and was so long before he made the switch. And he doesn't hide that information from his audiences. In fact, it is part of his "shtick." I think that the other reason why there is an emphasis on methods is because this is still just a hobby for a lot of people. Professionals do the same 10 effects for 1000's of people, while hobbyists perform thousands of effects for the same 10 people. But just because you're a Mentalist (professional or not) doesn't mean that you can't also have an interest in methods. Annemann certainly did... And Mental Magic. Some people love Mental Magic - Larry Becker comes to mind. And yet, I have seen many "Mentalists" who couldn't hold a candle to Larry. If you ask his audiences, I am also willing to bet that they'll tell you he is a "Mindreader." While these silly definitions may be fun to banter about back and forth from the armchair, in the real world the public simply doesn't care about them. I realize I've said a mouthful here, and I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with me. At the very least, I hope that I have provided some points to consider even if you disagree with some or all of them. There is no right or wrong in this argument. We would be better off united as brothers than divided because of definitions and egos. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Re-reading what I wrote in that last post, I realize that there was an additional point I wanted to make that got left out.
Speaking from my own experience, I found (and still find) that the hardest aspect of transitioning from Magic to Mentalism is in finding suitable presentational themes. This requires reading outside material in other related fields of study. It is also difficult to find themes and subjects that not only express parts of your personality, but also ones that are refreshing and new. In my opinion, I think that is where the main challenge lies. Those who have studied "Mentalism only" have a greater head-start on mining interesting and inspiring themes. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 15, 2017, Mindpro wrote: OK. I missed this post. You have a lot of sweeping generalizations there my friend. Do I really NEED to start listing my credentials? I have been a teacher for a great number of years and I have also taught some of the big "names" too. I left home at 14 and had to make a living IMMEDIATELY to survive. I did this by performing. I learned as I went, and I made it just fine. Obviously I did something right as I've been at it now for 36 years so don't try to say that I have no idea what I am talking about. There was no "fantasies" about the harsh conditions I had to learn from. That is real world talk right there. I'd love to see you try to do the same and make it. And here I was, trying to be a nice guy... |
|||||||||
Mindpro Eternal Order 10585 Posts |
Let's settle down there Thorr, there is not a single thing I've said that was about you. I was offering an overview of responses up to that point, if yours was in there, so be it. It was not directed to you.
Your credentials do not need to be offered as no one ever questioned them. Although this was my actual my point of how this can quickly go off in a direction waaaay beyond what the OP is seeking. But as an "educator" you obviously recognize that. You can call it "generalizations," I call it the reality of what it is. Thanks for you nice guy efforts and false accusations. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Here we go again with the typical passive aggresive attacks - all too common here. Talk @#$!! about somebody then feign innocence afterwards when they call you on it...
I'm going to bow out of this conversation now because if I don't, I am going to get myself in hot water. And by the way, the name is Thor - not Thorr. |
|||||||||
Alexxander Elite user Frankfurt, Germany 423 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 12, 2017, Mindpro wrote: Well, that certainly sounds like a fine idea, but this is simply not the way people get started. People start because they experienced the astonishment of a magic or mentalism performance and want to learn how to do it too. It's as simple as that. I think that these theoretical considerations you mentioned DO indeed play a significant role in the education of a mentalist, but not at the start. You get started by performing. Even Bob always recommended Henry Hay's Amateur Magicians Handbook as a starting point. It's a book full of methods and effects. I fully understand your wish to educate people about theoretical foundations of mentalism, but I think this comes with time and practice. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
After thinking on it a few minutes...
Forget it. I could care less and I'm not going anywhere. Better get used to it. Quote:
On Feb 15, 2017, Alexxander wrote: Couldn't have said it better. |
|||||||||
IAIN Eternal Order england 18807 Posts |
Why reveal sudo's first name? maybe we could start revealing other people's names too...
for some, mentalism is a static art - its probably the artform practiced where some would have you never deviate or try different things...if musicians thought the same, everyone with a guitar that sang the blues would sound like howlin' wolf or muddy waters, or played the harmonica and sound like little walter... howlin' wolf used to complain about the white boy RnB invasion, but then made an album with them all...and it was pretty good... so yes, definitely always, always learn the differences, the history, the classic techniques and routines - I don't think anyone is saying to resist doing that...and I think the frustrating thing more often than not, are the huge broadbrush strokes that everyone gets painted in if you're not a stage mentalist...(and the weird sucking up to the pro's at every given opportunity no matter what) - its annoying, its probably why its done from time to time, to provoke and then say "well, I didn't mean abc, I mean xyz..." what you ACTUALLY get over here in the uk is quite a division, there are plenty of parlour and stage style mentalists who do not do anything else....but some do...see? in this day and age, there's many channels to make your money, strengthen your brand and so on...i know people who have a two person act, a walk around set and a stage act... resist the urge to say "well, he's going to be seen as a magician then isn't he...". No. No he's not. Because he knows the dynamics and differences, and more importanly, YOU have not seen the acts, and as you don't know anything about the things you don't like (because you're not speaking from experience of those things) - then what's the motivation to say it, othere thatn IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, you have seen people do walk around, claiming they are a mentalist, when they're just doing some mental magic... this does not speak on behalf of everyone, have can it? seeing a lot fo them means that a lot of magicians try to put mentalism into their act...they are not mentalists...they don't recognise the differences...so labelling them as mentalists makes no sense other to support a point of view... so over here, there's guys who do banquet, parlour, mix 'n mingle, and some tour a fresh show every single year...they win awards, they achieve things, they work hard... The UK scene is much milaigned by this place, because you can go read latest and greatest and get the absolute worst experience and 'insights'...if your only experience is of chatter on here, that's not fair...for those that do probless, and do it badly, that's magicians and a handful of mental-magicians trying to mimic pete turner and others... have you ever seen the average audience members of penguin lectures? older men twirling cards during a docc Hilford lecture, so few young people...some, but not that many... remember the opening paragraph of PME, where annemann fires off a rallying cry of the crystal gazer, the podium and so on? he was fresh and new...he wanted change...and again, when the first raft of new age thinking came in, it was suddenly about chakras and crystals and candles...of mind-to-mind contact.... i think if annemann came back, he'd say "what? you still do it like *that*?!" every art form has to change, for good and bad, because it should be 'living'...it should reflect society of its day as past as the past... give those who work hard and understand the differences a little more room to breathe... of course a newbie shouldnt tell an experienced stage performer how to do it, but if they're using a forum to discuss things, then not every question is a dig or criticism...its just a question because they wanna understand something...
I've asked to be banned
|
|||||||||
Luan New user 10 Posts |
I'm loving the discussions on here. Sad that it maybe turned a bit sour but what can we do, this is, after all and internet forum :').
I would like to add to the post that, recently I started performing a simple trick for my friends, involving bi***t sw****ing. Coming from a magic background as I do, I noticed things ( this is from 5 performances at most ) that I thought were weird, and I haven't seen mentalists do. That is that whenever I was clean I would make it a point, I would show my hand empty, would emphasize that I'm not making any moves. That is one thing I noticed I do, that was a very weird thing. Any other people have had same experiences and revelations like this, care to share ? The other thing I decided to do, taking everyones advice was that I would learn a few basic techniques first, and some effects so that I can start performing right away. I will make a list of the "path" I want to take below, and if anyone has some recommendations on a change or a new point please do share. * Learn some basic techniques used in mentalism (bi***t sw****ing, ce***r t**r, pe**s etc -- please add if you have any suggestions) * Learn some effects using said techniques. * Performing those effects to gain knowledge on the difference between magic and mentalism, and also general tips on how to perform and what gets the most reaction. * Later on, start reading more and more on theory, and character development so I find my style. *??? *Profit. Any addition or change is greatly welcomed. That being said, can you please recommend some generally good effects, but also any effect that would help in bettering my performance and getting me more comfortable to doing something as bold as looking at what they just wrote and repeating it to them as if I have no idea. Again, thank you all. -Luan |
|||||||||
IAIN Eternal Order england 18807 Posts |
Why not try the richard osterlind Easy to Master Menal Miracles dvds?
I've asked to be banned
|
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
I can only assume I missed something and that a post was removed, because my actual name isn't appearing. But even if it did appear - big deal. It's not a big secret and I have nothing to hide anymore. I came on here several weeks ago and apologized for my deceptions and gave the reasons for doing so. And I'm glad that I did. I refuse to feel ashamed any further just because I fell into a dark place in my past. I can only learn from it. If somebody feels that is a tactic worth employing, it is only revealing of their true character and is pretty unclassy to say the least. Even if I hadn't had this issue in my past, I would still use a pseudonym - you see, I ACTUALLY use the material with audiences that I've released and shared with others.
I have performed many a stage show too. It's silly for anybody to make assumptions. I am more than happy to post pics of some of my stage performances too. I just don't favor stage, but I'd take a stage show in the past if necessary to pay the bills. I prefer the intimacy of close-up performances. One thing that has always bothered me about stage shows is that you are ABOVE the audience. I feel that spatial difference subconsciously transmits a notion that I am ABOVE them and it bothers me. I much prefer to be at eye-to-eye level with my audience. Yes, the material is a little different in a close environment (for obvious reasons), but that doesn't mean that it can't be just as equally effective. Iain's post was very insightful (as he often is) and very nicely summarizes a number of issues. As I've mentioned before, I really do believe that, as a group, we would be much better off united as brothers then divided by dogma and ego. How boring it would be if we were all the same. The world is rife with division these days and it is both sickening and sad to see. I recommended Osterlind at the beginning of this thread, and his Easy to Master mental Miracles has been recommended by Iain as well. You really absolutely cannot go wrong with that set. Another series that is excellent and contain a good number of modern classics is Max Maven's VideoMind Series. Add a copy of Practical Mental Effects into the basket and you really will have more than enough material to keep you VERY busy for a long time. There is so much good material in these that one could easily make a living with. Once you get going, you will be able to later determine if this is the path you want to walk, and if it is, then that becomes the time to start delving deeper into some of the more theoretical texts - at your own pace. And I apologize Luan, as it is partially my fault that things got a little bit sour in here - I just have a hard time biting my tongue when I hear lines of division. |
|||||||||
January Veteran user 390 Posts |
Quote:
That is that whenever I was clean I would make it a point, I would show my hand empty, would emphasize that I'm not making any moves. That is one thing I noticed I do, that was a very weird thing. Any other people have had same experiences and revelations like this, care to share ? Yes, this is a big no-no for mentalists. You never want the audience to even know you have any hands, much less call attention to empty ones. I did not come from a magic background, but I did experience the beginner impulse to really call attention to certain parts of the routine, especially those that would imply physical manipulation, and say, "LOOK I NEVER TOUCHED THE CARDS OR LOOKED AT THEM OR ANYTHING!!" but I learned it's just best just to leave that alone. |
|||||||||
January Veteran user 390 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 16, 2017, Luan wrote: I reread your post and wanted to add one more thing about this final comment. Look up some basic material on method acting, because a lot of mentalism hinges upon really believing yourself when you do something bold. When I act like I'm reading someone's mind, I really do try to do it. Sure, perhaps I already have the information, but I really try to do it. I remember as a child reading some fantasy books and wondering if telekinesis was possible. I sat in my room and genuinely tried to get a pencil to roll around on a table. I failed, but that genuine, childlike attempt is sort of what I want to get back to now. I want to really, genuinely try to bend metal, or read someone's mind and not just halfheartedly attempt to do it, or worse, just snap my fingers. When I'm performing mentalism, I need to genuinely be trying to read their mind. It's basically just a simple application of Stanislavski's "Magic If." If I really were able to read people's minds, it would probably take a lot of effort, and my attitude would be so different from someone doing a casual card trick at a party. |
|||||||||
Sudo Nimh Inner circle 1866 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 16, 2017, January wrote: I think I'd have to mostly agree with this. Over-proving is a definite carry-over from the Magician side of things - particularly with hands. Sometimes though, when it comes to cards etc, there are exceptions when you might actually really need to point out certain things such as "I have never touched the cards or looked through them" etc, etc. Not saying that's always the case, but there are times when doing so is integral to having the audience being able to fully appreciate the impossibility or fairness of things. It is mostly routine dependent I think, and definitely shouldn't be overdone. Osterlind is a good example of this. He definitely does point out those details when it becomes a strength to do so. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » General tips for beginner mentalists (49 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.11 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 < |