The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Whats all the fuss about new mentalism effects when same reaction can be get going back to the roots (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2~3 [Next]
LoveKey1988
View Profile
Elite user
443 Posts

Profile of LoveKey1988
I am wondering why do so many new effects appear in mentalism that are basically the same and some are quite talked about even if the same reaction can be get from a similar effects that you can start doing after going trough the first step of 13 steps to mentalism?

Take International Pocket Change or the other similar effect.

The spectator says one number between 1 and 100...the mentalist has that many cents in his pocket.

Now take this effect:

The mentalist tell the spectator to name one number between 1 and 100.

The spectator name a number. (for example 55)

The mentalist starts saying:

Now think about it...you could have chosen 23, you could have chosen 76, you could have chosen 62...there were so many choices...any number between 1 and 100.

As you know I am a mentalist and one of the things that I do is if I have a dream at night and I wake up I note small details about that dream on a post-it note from a pad which I keep near my bed along with a pencil.

And you may not believe this, says the mentalist gesticulating with his hands, but I had a dream about meeting you last night. And I dreamed that I was asking you to think of a number beetwen 1 and a 100 and you said 55. I woke up at that moment and sleepy right there in the darkness I wrote that number on the post it note pad and went back to sleep.

I took the pad today with me and when I saw you I knew one of those strange coincidences where dreams become reality was gonna happen.

Greg, ( or name of a spectator) please reach in my right pocket and take the pad of post it notes that I have there.

The spectator takes the notepad from your pocket and his number is written.

Whats the difference? Is there a diference in the eyes of the spectator?

Regards, Marian
John C
View Profile
Eternal Order
I THINK therefore I wrote
12447 Posts

Profile of John C
Different effect. One's a prediction actually the other could be influence or the other way around.

Different effect to the audience. Do the one you find most interesting, fun and managable.

But for Gosh sake don't make them magic tricks.
The ULTIMATE Routine Series: rebirth soon!
LoveKey1988
View Profile
Elite user
443 Posts

Profile of LoveKey1988
Where did I make them magic tricks?
innercirclewannabe
View Profile
Inner circle
Ireland
1594 Posts

Profile of innercirclewannabe
The main difference is that most of your audience will have never read 13 steps. So, it all comes back to one thing, irrespective of what book you've read, or the effect you are doing - your "Presentation" is what really matters!
Tá sé ach cleas má dhéanann tú sé cuma mhaith ar cheann.
John C
View Profile
Eternal Order
I THINK therefore I wrote
12447 Posts

Profile of John C
Quote:
On 2012-06-25 14:25, LoveKey1988 wrote:
Where did I make them magic tricks?


no one said you did bro. just advice.
The ULTIMATE Routine Series: rebirth soon!
LoveKey1988
View Profile
Elite user
443 Posts

Profile of LoveKey1988
Yes presentation is what really matters how true is that. And yes my audiece will not read 13 steps but I expect most people doing mentalism did.

Regards, Marian

Quote:
On 2012-06-25 14:29, innercirclewannabe wrote:
The main difference is that most of your audience will have never read 13 steps. So, it all comes back to one thing, irrespective of what book you've read, or the effect you are doing - your "Presentation" is what really matters!
innercirclewannabe
View Profile
Inner circle
Ireland
1594 Posts

Profile of innercirclewannabe
Quote:
On 2012-06-25 14:35, LoveKey1988 wrote:
Yes presentation is what really matters how true is that. And yes my audiece will not read 13 steps but I expect most people doing mentalism did.

Regards, Marian

Quote:
On 2012-06-25 14:29, innercirclewannabe wrote:
The main difference is that most of your audience will have never read 13 steps. So, it all comes back to one thing, irrespective of what book you've read, or the effect you are doing - your "Presentation" is what really matters!



You'd be surprised! Smile
Tá sé ach cleas má dhéanann tú sé cuma mhaith ar cheann.
Phil Ainsworth
View Profile
Regular user
177 Posts

Profile of Phil Ainsworth
13 steps will always be a solid source of material in the world of mentalism, and contains enough methods and effects to keep any mentalist going for a while.... however, I'm a firm believer that INNOVATION is the most important thing to focus on, for any performer...

It is our duty to create, adapt and innovate... we owe it to our audiences, ourselves, our craft and each other.

I have to say, I disagree with your statement that "the same reaction" can be achieved by going back to the roots.
Times change, audiences are MUCH more sophisticated (in a sense) in modern times... however, they are also much more naieve in another...

I believe that credence and pseudo-explanation is of a far greater importance to a 21st century audience... In Corinda's day an amazing effect could be performed, and the performer would leave the audience wondering if they had "special powers"...

A modern audience (of teenagers and adults, I mean, children are a different case) will immediately rule out the "special powers hypothesis.... we are far too cynical in the 21st century to believe in real magic. Therefore, modern performers tend to sacrifice outstanding, inexplicable effects for those which are impressive, but still credible... if the audience buy the pseudo-explanation...

I guess I'm saying that I believe that we can't get the same reaction today by performing effects straight out of Corinda's (or Annemann, Dunninger or Fogel, etc) because the mere repetition of method ISN'T enough, anymore... modern audiences want to know HOW we do this (or they want to THINK they know how, at least)... and that just wasn't a consideration of mentalists back in the 50s and 60s (IMHO).

Also just look at the leaps and bounds mentalism has taken in the last 20 years... the work of Banachek, Derren Brown, Max Maven to name but a few... look at the developments both in technology and in concepts such as "dual reality".... we must continue to push forward and move further in our craft.

Just my 2ps worth, anyway Smile

Enigma, Mind Writer
Mindpro
View Profile
Eternal Order
10323 Posts

Profile of Mindpro
New materials often offer new handling, new twists, new applications and adaptations to longtime content, and can also offer new reactions. Yes, there are the same primary principles, but new and updated spins on these keep it continuing. It's similar to music. One would think after all these years those same eight notes would have been used written, played, applied and grouped in all possible combinations, yet new and updated ideas and material still is coming out and going strong.

Plus much of what comes out is really magic or mental magic, as opposed to what many purists consider to be true mentalism. I think this is evident and is happening due to the trend targeted towards the many magicians desiring to come over into mentalsim. However, many of these people think that just by doing these mental magic tricks or effects somehow makes them a mentalist. This is where the confusion, interpretation and often frustration begins. I talk to younger all the time that believe they are doing mentalism when in fact they are doing a trick with a mental theme, and nothing more. I had a guy send me his demo DVD just in Mid may for consideration claiming to be a up and coming mentalist. Upon viewing it he is performing much of the exact same material several of our magicians are doing just with the premise, or backstory of being mentalism.

You must also remember the content in those standards (books) offer the mechanics and principles, but mentalism is all about the performers' believability and performance that creates the true impact. So ultimately it's what you do with this info. This too is why new releases continue, so others can offer what they've done with these tools.

I also think Richard Osterlind showed us in his 13 Steps DVD set and his upcoming new set, how these old classics can still work, yet also offer updates which many consider improvements and advances. This kind of makes the timeless, trendy again.
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5718 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
We tend to love things new.

But hey, if they all work, use them... Smile
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
Mindpro
View Profile
Eternal Order
10323 Posts

Profile of Mindpro
I also think that audiences are more sophisticated, smarter, resourceful, and (and impatient) therefore it takes more to amaze or blow them away. By taking these longtime classics and and adapting them allows them to better suited to play for and amaze for today's audiences
LoveKey1988
View Profile
Elite user
443 Posts

Profile of LoveKey1988
I have to disagree with the affirmation that people today stopped believing in supernatural and the power of the mind. I know that I only performed some simple mentalism effects at times and I had people especially girls asking me to tell them their future, read their palm and etc. and they really believed I could do it.

Also I did not say that new mentalism should no longer be published and that there is nothing new. On the contrary there are a lof of great new thinkers that amaze with thier thinking and we can learn from one another.

The only thing I said is that some effects are basically the same effect that can be done very easily with a nw and I wonder why do so many people talk about them like they are much more powerful that something you can do with the old nw.

And by the way people today may be more sopisticathed but I think that pocket change looks more like a magic effect than a simple writing on a piece of paper.

I do not think that effect is bad. It's good for someoe that wants something different.

Regards, Marian
Cristobal
View Profile
Loyal user
Malaga (Spain)
288 Posts

Profile of Cristobal
If you only have one method you can only predict one or two things in the same show... or use repeatedly the NW. The more methods you have in your arsenal, more presentations you'll be able to perform. I mean, if in a routine you need to predict a name, a city and an amount of change you can use the NW three times... Leaving aside the fact that this is artistically very boring and poor theater, you are repeating the same technique three times in a row.
saurabh
View Profile
New user
86 Posts

Profile of saurabh
A user above pointed out the difference between two effects saying one's a prediction effect while the other is an influence effect. With reference to that, if I can force a card on someone, then gaze into their eyes intensely and 'read' their mind, and reveal the card.
Also, I can predict a card, use the same force and show that the prediction matches. Would the two classify as different effects or the same?
The ability demonstrated by them is different, yet the method is identical. How does one classify this?

Also, I can speak for my country so far, the modern, key word here 'modern' audience is indeed not so gullible. If I were to introduce myself, the first thought in their mind would indeed be trickery. After a few hard hitting effects, I may be able to instill a slight doubt at the very best. Of course, parts of the country are not so urban, and their the story is different.
Peter_turner
View Profile
V.I.P.
Bradford, West Yorkshire
1347 Posts

Profile of Peter_turner
Quote:
On 2012-06-25 15:28, Mindpro wrote:
I also think that audiences are more sophisticated, smarter, resourceful, and (and impatient) therefore it takes more to amaze or blow them away. By taking these longtime classics and and adapting them allows them to better suited to play for and amaze for today's audiences


Agreed!

Pete
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5718 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On 2012-06-26 06:42, Cristobal wrote:
If you only have one method you can only predict one or two things in the same show... or use repeatedly the NW. The more methods you have in your arsenal, more presentations you'll be able to perform. I mean, if in a routine you need to predict a name, a city and an amount of change you can use the NW three times... Leaving aside the fact that this is artistically very boring and poor theater, you are repeating the same technique three times in a row.


And the more methods you are proficient at, the less likely anyone will look for "the method", as each method should cancel out each other's possible explanation. Smile
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
John C
View Profile
Eternal Order
I THINK therefore I wrote
12447 Posts

Profile of John C
Quote:
On 2012-06-26 09:50, Peter_turner wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-06-25 15:28, Mindpro wrote:
I also think that audiences are more sophisticated, smarter, resourceful, and (and impatient) therefore it takes more to amaze or blow them away. By taking these longtime classics and and adapting them allows them to better suited to play for and amaze for today's audiences


Agreed!

Pete


I don't agree entirely. Whenever I think they know it all I find they really were impressed. Don't give them that much credit. Look at society. You think they are more siphisticated and more intelligent? Look at me I can't even spell siphisticated.
The ULTIMATE Routine Series: rebirth soon!
Peter_turner
View Profile
V.I.P.
Bradford, West Yorkshire
1347 Posts

Profile of Peter_turner
Times change, therefore presentations, effects and method must change. It's a nice point to view from (thinking everyone knows everything) even if only for self improvement.

Pete
David Thiel
View Profile
Inner circle
Western Canada...where all that oil is
3946 Posts

Profile of David Thiel
REALLY sit and watch Osterlind's updates on the 13 Steps. Do it with your copy of the book on your lap.

Watch the reactions of the modern day audiences, and tell me if they are not utterly delighted and mystified by what they see...and PLEASE don't trot out the old argument that L&L audiences are selected to be friendly to the performer. If you've worked these particular 13 Steps ( Smile ) then you know that they are still hugely effective on the audiences of today. Osterlind and Sisti just put a modern spin on Corinda's material. But it's all essentially the same method.

Watch Osterlind performing the Mental E*ic -- a comparatively old effect -- and watch the audience reaction. (There's a link to this presentation right here in Penny.) No electronics...just an "innocent" blackboard. Does this NEED updating?

Of course we have to update and innovate. But do the METHODS necessarily change? Not as much as many people think.

How many versions of Sneak Thief are out there -- each one different -- each one essentially the same method? How about NW routines...or billets...pendulums? How many of these are still being used every day by performers to mystify?

I love stuff from ProM*stic. It adds a component to my shows that I would not have otherwise. But if I were forced to choose between the new electronic stuff and the "classics" -- there'd be no question. I'd go with the classics -- and not out of some misguided sense of loyalty. I'd choose them because the classics work. That's why they're called 'classics.'

David
Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Except bears. Bears will kill you.


www.MindGemsBrainTrust.com
www.magicpendulums.com
www.MidnightMagicAndMentalism.com
LoveKey1988
View Profile
Elite user
443 Posts

Profile of LoveKey1988
Exactly what I am saying.

Regards, Marian

Quote:
On 2012-06-26 10:40, David Thiel wrote:
REALLY sit and watch Osterlind's updates on the 13 Steps. Do it with your copy of the book on your lap.

Watch the reactions of the modern day audiences, and tell me if they are not utterly delighted and mystified by what they see...and PLEASE don't trot out the old argument that L&L audiences are selected to be friendly to the performer. If you've worked these particular 13 Steps ( Smile ) then you know that they are still hugely effective on the audiences of today. Osterlind and Sisti just put a modern spin on Corinda's material. But it's all essentially the same method.

Watch Osterlind performing the Mental E*ic -- a comparatively old effect -- and watch the audience reaction. (There's a link to this presentation right here in Penny.) No electronics...just an "innocent" blackboard. Does this NEED updating?

Of course we have to update and innovate. But do the METHODS necessarily change? Not as much as many people think.

How many versions of Sneak Thief are out there -- each one different -- each one essentially the same method? How about NW routines...or billets...pendulums? How many of these are still being used every day by performers to mystify?

I love stuff from ProM*stic. It adds a component to my shows that I would not have otherwise. But if I were forced to choose between the new electronic stuff and the "classics" -- there'd be no question. I'd go with the classics -- and not out of some misguided sense of loyalty. I'd choose them because the classics work. That's why they're called 'classics.'

David
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Whats all the fuss about new mentalism effects when same reaction can be get going back to the roots (0 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2~3 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2022 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.23 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL