Or Kennedy it shows a certain double standard in your views.. Be against those that copy but claim innocence when you do it. Your statement in your Blog completely underlines what I have been saying about YOU..

Just back down whilst you have an ounce of dignity left, go write another book (once you gone through 13 steps again.) There are two types of people that would deal with the allegations I have made, one would admit that effects have been borrowed whilst the other would continue to dig themselves into a hole which yiou have done..

You are an intelligent chap Kennedy, read your blog again and then read all of my posts in this topic..
Can you honestly say with your hand on your heart that you don't understand the points I make?
Can you honestly say that many readers of your book will not look at what has been said and actually put two and two together?

Andy Nyman on his Get Nyman DVD has a routine that is literally Sneak Thief, he went to enormous lengths to get hold of Becker and get permission.. Where as you feel just mentioning a name is enough along with "Oh just found out the routine I created 10 years ago which I don't perform is close to an idea by ......"

Your knowledge for a 21 year old is good, but your attempts at profesionalism reflect your young years..

The work in your book does have value it's just that you didn't really create much of it..

A.R.

Come on Andrew enough of the witch hunt your getting quite personal.

That is subjective. I haven't read the book so I cannot pass comment, but it is interesting to read the debate and wonder. Are the routines in the book simply variations on existing themes or does it contain original work? Andrew says it is a rehash, Kennedy says that nothing is 100% original these days. Very interesting stuff. It also shows that you have to be prepared if you put your head over the parapet to get it shot at; you have to admire Kennedy for putting the effort in at least, I guess.

I just purchased Kennedy's book, "Thoughts so Far" at Cafépress.com/mindofkennedy. I look forward in reading it. I am sure I will learn a lot of strong, practical mentalism that has actually been used before a real paying audience. I have heard that there is a strong coin bending effect in the book entitled "Cold Bending" where a coin bends in the spectator's hands without the performer touching the coin. It is always exciting to read a real working professional's new routines and twists and refinements on already used themes.

Best regards,

Michael

You are incorrect in your assertion that the Spice girls were "talentless bimbos in skirts."

Sporty Spice wore jogging trousers.

D.Paul writes: "Come on Andrew enough of the witch hunt your getting quite personal."
In your opinion...

My opinion differs:

This started with an honest review of a book written by someone who apparently made a legitimate attempt at writing a good book on a topic he is passionate about. Andrew then tried to back his review with what he believes to be facts.

I personally think that the review by Andrew was a fair one and I believe he deserves credit for bringing a different point of view than the rest of the posted views. Like MarkyMark states, it’s good to have a good range of opinions. This is what the Café is for.

To Andrew’s further defense, I also picked up a few things in Kennedy’s book that I have seen elsewhere before. For example, Kennedy describes an item that is identical to Barrie Richardson’s Any Card at Any Number. Kennedy even credits Barrie Richardson. If his routine was identical to Richardson’s why did he choose to print it? That’s beyond me. Since he mentions Mr. Richardson in the credit of that particular item, it’s difficult to believe he didn’t know that it was a perfect duplicate.

For the most part, I enjoyed Kennedy’s book. His enthusiasm for mentalism is obvious. I enjoyed reading about his thought process BUT, as a reader, I must admit I ended up being annoyed, to say the least, on a number of occasions when I saw items that were identical to other published items. To me this is not so much a question of ethics but a realization that he might be slightly too… eager to publish any stuff for… whatever reason. Thus, it makes me question his enthusiasm about the rest of his material. I am sure that, as an author and creator, that is not Kennedy’s end goal.

All that being said, I am looking forward to more of Kennedy’s work. I liked the energy I sensed through his words.

My advice to Kennedy, for what it’s worth (you’ve never heard of me and probably never will), would be to simply thank all those who took the time to read your book and all those who took the time to write a review, especially those who may seem critical of your work. Do your best to address their concerns in your next book while still remaing true to yourself....

Jean-Luc

P.S. I know neither Kennedy nor Andrew…

A witch hunt is targeted at innocent women labeled witches.. I am passing comment on a book I have read from cover to cover. A witch hunt as you would call it would regarless of content or the authors rationale I would go in hammer and tongs to discredit him. That is a witch hunt.

The issues I have raised are legitimate concerns about other peoples work, Kennedy has responded to this with half baked responses that really do not address what I have said.

I credit the book with having some good ideas and being useful to the enthusiast.

I wonder D.Paul how you would feel if someone took a routine you had created and put it out as his own? I doubt that day will come but think about it. Anyone can go though their collections of books and revamp routines with nothing more than calling it another name just like that magic company who pirated everyone and sold the effects as their own.

When they do it and sell it for profit practically everyone on this site went for them in one way or another..
Which I must add is the right thing to do.. How dare they take other peoples work and sell it as their own at a cheaper price. I would NOT put Kennedy in this category but he isn't far from it..

We all see DVDs and books with ideas based on others which is fine as we and our creations evolve, BUT it is done with a code of conduct, a mutual respect for fellow creators.

Kennedy has side lined this code of conduct and in his eagerness to get a book out has piled routines together many of which truly belong to others. That is my point of posting, not a witch hunt as you call it.

Why am I an arse for passing comment? Kennedy has not addressed a single issue, he just comes back with but my book does have value, I have done the routines, why are you picking on me? I am not picking on anyone, I gave Kennedy some legitimate advice about his career in this field, trust me if I didn't like him I would not offer advice.

And although he took offence to it, my commenting on him being 'A nice chap' is genuine, I have read many of his posts and he has great enthusiasm. But that does not take away from what I found when I read his book.

And to be honest it drives me crazy when people who are not very well read in this field say things like "Kennedy has a great drawing dupe in his book." this then gives the impression Kennedy created it and he didn't.

The problem is some here really know their stuff, whilst others believe to be a knowledgable practioner of the art all you need to do is read the latest books and buy the latest effects.. If you claim to really know (which many here do) make sure you REALLY do know.

I find Max Maven to be a little annoying but one thing can be said for the man, he knows who, what and where many of his effects come from in fine detail. If you love something enough then do it justice.

Simply crediting people as possibly creating something simular or making excuses about having never seen this effect or that effect is not good enough. The creators deserve more than that.
Kennedy failed to do this in his book which shows his eagerness and unprofessionalsim.


A.R.

I don't understand is kenedy a bad person for copying?

Criss
I've gotten burned over Cheryl Tiegs,
Blown up for Raquel Welch.
But when I end up in the hay it's only hay, Hey Hey

I suppose that would depend on whether you would call selling other's work with a minor repackaging as your own as being bad. Seriously though, I personally don't think Kennedy is a bad person. Immature and slightly misguided maybe but as Andrew says, his enthusiasm for mentalism is evident and that's always to be commended.

Kennedy is not a bad person at all, he does however need to address the issues raised if he intends to release other material. The book in question is barely a year old and he is already talking about another book release.

Is this a case of making a quick buck? Surely this 21 year old man doesn't expect us to believe he has used every routine in his few years of performing?

Andy Leviss is another young performer who released a book called Ramblings & Revelations, now whilst I think much of what he wrote was misguided they were his thoughts about the art. Kennedy asks us to believe he has been performing for some time as a mind reader and the routines we are purchasing are tried and tested from his working performances. I find this to require a stretch of the imagination as when I did see him perform he used nothing from his book or Tell Tale Factor that sales blurb reads like the Holy Grail.

If you are releasing a book make sure most of it is your own or at the very least get permission from those you have borrowed or been inspired by and secondly if it is a book of ideas don't tell us every routine has been audience tested.

Bob Cassidy's recent book is full of over twenty years of being in the business, he credits many others who he actually knows, the routines show evolution quite a few have been updated in the book. If you have any interest in Mentalism and Mind Reading read 13 steps, Mind Myth & Magick, Practical Mental Magic, Prism, Artful Mentalism, Maximum Entertainment, Mind & Magic Of Berglas.. These books are steeped in tried and tested routines, years of trial and error and are creations from the creators not reworded variations by a newbie.

Kennedy has potential but is not quite where he thinks he is. The radio clips on his website also show a lack of maturity in performance also.

A.R.

Is there any place in the U.S. to get your book Kennedy?

Sure John,

http://www.cafepress.com/mindofkennedy

Thanks again

Has anyone noticed how RIVARDJLR looks a little bit like Nicholas Parsons?

Who is Nicholas Parsons ??? My culture is mostly ...French.

Nicholas Parsons is a gay radio presenter in the UK. Formerly on television he now presents a panel show entitled 'Just a Minute' on Radio4.
I think it was Salsa Dancer who informed me that Snail used to be friendly with Nicholas Parsons and... well, misses him.
And yes, you do resemble him. You're a very good looking young man Rivardjlr. Please don't think it's gone unoticed.

Bobser

Kennedy - be a bit more careful
Andrew R. - go away

RIVARDJLR

Here's a link to http://www.online-visions.com which includes one of Kennedy's effects called Open Transmission.

http://www.online-visions.com/effects/0505kennedy.html

I understand that this is one of the effects included in his book 'Thoughts So Far'.

Regards

EC

I make valid points the insults are hurled at me first so naturally I defend myself and my views which incidentally I have had over 50 pm's from guys who totally agree with me. Such a shame they can't be as open as me. That's politics I guess.

I am more than happy to meet any of you for a polite discussion on my views.
A.R.

Just my thoughts,
I know kennedy only from sending mails and chatting on yahoo, but what I can say
is that he is a great thinker in our art, he is a very smart and friendly person.

btw ANDREW, he sounds also very professional on the bbc interview.

would like to hear you in and interview too or maybe you write a book sometimes so we can judge about you too?

I think people like osterlind and others will not be wrong to say such good words about kennedy.

sorry it´s hard to explain it in english for me what I mean but i´m sure you understand.

maybe it´s some peoples confession to make others bad?

mario

That is your opinion Mario. Andrew has his. Agree to disagree.