Very useful thread! It gives me very good ideas about presentation as I am still working to build my style.

Some things that bother me when I watch mentalism, and I don't think they have been mentioned yet:

I am kind of annoyed when the performer of a book test starts doing real or fake math to get an approximation of the number of words in the book and to point out that, hey, there really are a lot of words in a book! Wow, what a revelation! If one is buying time, isn't there any less obvious line to do so? If one is using a book test where asking the spectator to check the number of pages is necessary for the effect, well, that's different I guess.

Also: "Let's put it in here for safekeeping" when the performer places something written by the spectator in a book, a wallet, on a pad, etc, and then handles the item in various ways (opens the wallet, puts it in a pocket, etc). To me it is like saying "Let's put this juicy meatball in the cat's bowl for safekeeping". I know the putting away thing is structural to several effects, but it is very hard to make such a senseless line sound psychologically invisible. Some performers simply say "Let's put it here for a second" and move on fast enough that one may not even notice the strangeness of the action. I find that to be a much for effective handling.

This being said I agree with what several said before: context and performer's unique style are key factors, and some excellent performers can make the most awkward sentences work like a charm.

My compliments on presenting multiple ideas on this thread of value to presenting mentalism and life in general (opinion). These also why you "hang in there" on the Café' despite a certain futility.

Dealing with my "thought from a different perspective" must also be vexing -- but I also will "hang in there" with a goal of having folk think rather than just accept any particular point of view.

so ...

when you offer to demonstrate any ability for the purpose of "entertaining someone" do you not already make yourself "less believable?"

Yes, a good back-story can justify why you limit the demonstration to something trivial, but why demonstrate some limited ability at all?

More and more people apparently lack the ability to entertain themselves and "go out" seeking "to be entertained." They could gather with a group of friends and explore innate "paranormal" abilities, or study up on how their own suspected unusual ability might be of value -- or, they can pay to see someone pretend at doing something ...

No disrespect -- there is room for a few performers who can offer this form of entertainment for those seeking that particular form of entertainment or mental challenge. You are one that I might pay to see.

The problem, for me, is the shift of many performers away from a previous performance skill (or lack of same) such as conjury, juggling, balloon-tying to mentalism in a belief that this is what a general audience desires or will enjoy.

If a person goes to an announce magic show, why is it presumed they will like to see mentalism?

Those classified as "magicians" by mentalists are put down for throwing in an occasional mentalism type effect during a show or doing what mentalist deem "mental magic."

but, from where comes the idea that a general audience seeking to be entertained is going to enjoy some limited demonstration of mental ability with a long back-story?

Here is the believability? To claim to have such an ability for an audience expecting some other form of entertainment has no basis for believability at all.

Again -- if people purchase a ticket specifically to see a Mentalist in action, there is a basic set of beliefs and expectations that can be manipulated/caressed.

I might agree that all people harbor some belief or desire for a personal paranormal ability - validation more than fantasy. But how is this enhanced by a stranger claiming to have such an ability and to demonstrate it on a street corner for shekels? The very "claim" makes the whole presentation less than believable.

The problem might be that many are presenting Mentalism with neither the presence nor empathy to do it properly -- they failed at doing magic tricks so they will do mentalism tricks instead.

By example, I might be entertained by a person who cannot speak a coherent sentence or do sums in their head when they juggle or walk a tight wire. Why would I be entertained by this person claiming to have some special mental ability.

Most young people today cannot even finds their home town on a map. To "claim" to have some special mental ability is not believable at all.

First must come the ability to be believable at all -- to be a person worth listening to, a person with demonstrated values, intelligence, taste and discretion.

.........................................

it is not that there are too many Mentalist. It is that there are too few people who should be Mentalists. Being "believable" takes work -- something few today are will to invest.

Just a minority opinion ...

...that goes for forum posts too...

Seems like my point about a back story has been missed. I think I clearly stated that the back story was for the performer, NOT the audience. I never explain my back story, which is actually a subscript, to an audience. Its purpose is simply to provide an inner consistency to my presentations.

If you consider yourself an actual "mentalist" then you need to use the proper jargon to sell it. I use tried and true words that drive home that I have "the gift"

"no the clean hand. Oh, that was the clean hand"

That tells them them my powers of observation are acute.

"Do you want to change your mind? You're happy with the mind you have?"

That lets them know that their thoughts are mine to manipulate.

Marco called up another issue that I don’t like about many book tests. Of course another thread already has my opinion about “math tricks”, but I also wonder, if the point is to name a word, and the excuse is that maybe a book will give you more choices than you could think of on your own, why do any math? Or pick two cards? Or choose one of these numbers? Why specify a page number at all? Why wouldn’t they just take the book, open it to any page at all, and select a word from that page? Banachek has a couple interesting solutions, and MOABT has great potential, but most of what I see, as the thread title suggests, “makes me cringe”.

Delaying is another tactic that doesn’t always have a distinct “line”, but can be a little obvious if you’re not careful. When I’m doing an “impromptu” mind control (with NW), I’ll “write” down my answer with a pencil, then ask them to name the first thing that comes to mind. My delay is “Now that wasn’t the first thing you thought of was it?” It gives me the time I need, but can become almost a cliché if I do it often.

And to echo Funsway, Bob you must never leave the Café!

Lol. Very true Marco.

Andreu.

:firedevil:

AMEN!

I have tid-bits that show up here and there in my press materials or any number of shut-eye books I've penned over the years that serve as building blocks around my persona that cover everything from family oddities to areas of personal study. I don't have to explain any of this to the audience in that the "rumor mill" does all of that work for me . . . people love to know more about the "star" of a show than others and because of this, trivia nuggets go a long way.

Similarly, I'm one of those that works within the shut-eye industry as a legitimate Reader & Lecturer on Metaphysics and Spirituality which gets superimposed onto my performance work and vice-versa e.g. people will credit me as being a far more potent "Psychic" because of what they've seen in a show and then, in an entirely different way, I get the same affect when people apply what they've learned from me by way of my day job. . . and by the way, this is a very old and established practice in Mentalism; working in the Psychic community as the real deal, in that it opens many doors for us when it comes to smaller venues and steadier work. . . not everyone wants to be a touring showman.

When it comes to lines I absolutely loathe, the biggest for me is "Readings for Entertainment's Sake"

Even when you are deliberately doing comical Readings (unless they are pure satire) people will apply them to things in their life and as such there is an obligation for us to understand that it's usually us, as the Reader/Mentalist that gets "entertained" by people's reactions to the Readings and not the other way around. We owe it to the public to be honest and state clearly that we are working with a given oracle and the Reading is based on that system, it's not something otherworldly, we aren't talking to angels or fairie folk, etc.

. . . at least that's how I see it.