I hope this doesn't count as Off-Topic as it is not strictly referring to performing magic as part of church entertainment or with a Christian message *but* since I'm guessing that most of the contributors to this particular board are Christians it's the place where I'm likely to be able to get the feedback I need without taking up too much bandwidth for other people to whom the issue is less relevant.

(Phew, what a preamble.)

I've recently got back into magic as a hobby after several years away from it, largely after being inspired by your newer performers like Blaine, Derren Brown etc. The big secret (that Presentation is more powerful than the simple trick itself) has finally clicked, and I'm taking it seriously this time round, putting in the effort to learn the sleights and so forth rather than rely on packet tricks.

Most of my audiences are adults, and the best results come from surprising them with magic rather than wandering up with a deck of cards and announcing "want to see a trick" *but* so much of the mentalist effects that get the better responses imply a worldview that flies in the face of my known Christian beliefs. I don't want to give the impression that I believe in the validity of telepathy, PK etc *but* I don't want to take all the wind out of my performing sails by labeling what I do as "just a trick" (they'll figure that bit out, but for me to label it as such seems pretty dim.)

Rambling thoughts I know... have any of the other contributors to this board faced the same issues or should I just go back, read Galatians again, and stop worrying about it?

I've also struggled with this problem. It seems like there fine line between weakening the effect and endorsing telepathy or things like that. I think that it depends on the people you are performing for. Some people are utterly convinced that you can read their mind if you just force a card and then tell them what it is. Some people see this as a simple trick. I do think everyone has their personal line of when things change from simple magic tricks to real mind reading or some kind of phenomena.

The key is to figure out the person you are performing for. If they start to praise you for being some kind of god or something (and this does happen), kindly tell them that you're just an entertainer. If the person already knows that you are a magician and that there is obviously a trick to it, don't say anything. It's a judgment call.

Hope this helps. I would be interested to hear others views on this as well.

I think our Special Guest of the month had some great thoughts on this. It was all about how our audiences give us a gift when they "Willingly" suspend belief.

That inside, the majority of our audiences know we really can't read minds, and that when they agree to let us entertain them, it is their gift to us.

He goes on more about this, but I would say that his thoughts apply to us more than we might know.

RevJohn

When performing in Church I explain that I am an entertainer with a message. That only Jesus performs miracles and to borrow a saying from Duane Laflin, I do surprises for their eyes.
If presentation is more powerful than the trick then message also is more important in this setting.
When performing outside of Church I feel no such disclaimer is necessary.
ChrisG

James Randi uses and expression that "Remember, this isn't real, these are tricks and I am a trickster."

That works for me.

I do a routine for youth groups where, although I don't expose methods, I show them how they can be fooled by people who profess "powers".

That's a very valid point - and I'm currently working through Ian Rowland's astonishingly good book on Cold Reading. At present I'm not sure how to work this technique into my "method" but I certainly know two things:

1) I'm not going to be trying to genuinely convince people that I'm channeling Auntie Betty from the great cosmic retirement village

2) I'm definitely not going to expose the techniques used to a lay audience

...so I guess I'm going to have to walk a tightrope in warning people how convincing charlatans can be without actually exposing method.

As a, “by the way”, comment, TV mediums like John Edward *really* wind me up. The UK's own Derek Acorah actually had the gall to ask a woman in his audience "Who's John?" and then failed to identify whether John had passed on or not... as Mr. Rowland says on his site about a similar incident, surely that's one bit of information that couldn't fail to get through.

Thanks for all the advice guys,

Peace

Out of interest...

What prevents a Christian from accepting that certain skills such as telekinesis and ESP are possible? I'm not a Christian, but I don't see why the two are incompatible.

Mal

Jolly good question! I can't think offhand of any specific Biblical ***ction against such things *but* the public perception of psychic phenomena is that they reflect a worldview distinct from the Christian one - and I think my concern is more to distance myself from those worldviews than to stand on a soapbox and pronounce "Telepathy is Satan's Radio".

Since people know I'm a Christian, I want to avoid muddying the waters by inviting comparison with the hucksters like false mediums etc.

Haven't got time for a more in depth answer at present, so sorry if this seems a bit rushed. I'll try to add more thoughts when I have a moment spare.

------------------------------------------------------
Posted: Dec 15, 2003 12:19pm

As an appendix to the post above, why has the perfectly innocent word "I N J U N C T I O N" been automatically ammended to ***ction?

Am I inadvertently using a hitherto unknown obscenity?

Thanks for the answer.

The reason I ask is that I've looked through the posts in this section and have found many who are very outspoken against mentalism. I was wondering if there is a specific reason for this (e.g. do they associate mentalism with the "John Edward" school), or if there is a dogmatic blanket objection to the art.

Mal

P.S. No idea why the censor squad took out the word I N J U N C T I O N. Something to do with a derogatory term for native Americans?

The reason I am cautious of presenting mentalism is that is easy to perform and take on the persona of someone who knows all, sees all, etc., and that position is reserved for God. And that is pure deception.

And if you present in a way that implies or is explained as having been informed by a Spirit, that would directly against Biblical cautions about Spirit talk, and be akin to consorting with the Witch of Endor and was done by King Saul.

However I do a variety of prediction effects, with caution to make them an illustration, and not to take credit for Knowing things that only God could know.

As for the **** inserted, there is no censor squad here at The Magic Café. There is however a rule set that says you can't insult or attack based on culture or heritage, etc, and Mal was right about the possible derogatory term for native Americans being the trigger for the replacement.

No content is ever censored. If it is doesn't fit within the rules, then it violates the agreement a member accepted when signing up, and it is deleted. If it not flagrant, and just slipped outside of the rules, the member gets a message explaining why it was deleted, and a copy of the post to edit and resubmit when appropriate changes have been made. But there is NO censoring here. But all of that is explained in The Café Rules forum.

BroDavid

Ah! Thanks for clearing up the problem with the word. The filter must be pretty handy at preventing offensive content but if it "censors" an innocent word for containing letters that taken out of context could be perceived as offensive that's actually quite amusing.

The Saul/Witch of Endor incident always amused me. Whether the Witch was in contact with demonic spirits or was actually using some form of cold reading shtick it was blatantly obvious from her reaction when Samuel appeared that she was *not* used to genuinely contacting the spirits of the departed. Abject terror, I think, just about covers her response.

Mal:

Although this will appear as a shameless plug, I do deal with your question in my co-authored book "Astrology and Psychic Phenomena."

It is available through Amazon and other companies/bookstores.

I've mentioned it in the "Good News" forum before, but since you're a new user and asking the question, I just thought I'd bring it up again.

Not every Christian would agree with my research, but I do believe it makes an interesting read.

Feel free to PM me if you have any more questions.

Terry

All,

Secular mentalists face ethical dilemmas about deception of the audience as well. Just take a look at some of the threads in the "Penny for your thoughts" section.

Merlin

My feeling on this, for all it is worth, is if you don't do yourself up like Maven, then there should really be little problem.

Merlin,

Great reminder!!

RevJohn

I've enjoyed reading this topic. It includes some fairly common ground I've read and covered over the years in other lists and private boards.

Regarding the above quote, I'm not so sure I'd agree with it. And here's why.

I stopped doing Gospel magic shows a few years ago. I replaced it with a mentalism show. Without going to deeply into the specifics, the basic premise is "appearances can be deceiving." Parts of this post are actually part of my thirty minute presentation.

It's long been my opinion that one of Satan's greatest deceptions was the concept that he's this hideous, horned, pointy-tailed ogre. That's not the Satan described in my Bible.

In Genesis, the Hebrew word used for him is "nachash" which can be translated in a number of ways, including the word "serpent". But when you consider the entire verse, "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made" you may be led to what is probably a more valid definition: an enchanter.

When you also consider other references to Lucifer, you can easily conclude he was a very beautiful, engaging creature. His boastful and prideful behavior is born of his beauty.

Appearance can be deceiving.

Paul, writing to the Church at Corinth (2 Cor. chapter 11) stated "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore [it is] no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works."

I make absolutely no disclaimers, other than these points. I've found that mentalism far more than magic has allowed me to drive home the point that we are to put on the armor of God and be on guard.

The presentation is not at all heavy, just as my "secular" mentalism sets are not heavy. But the absolute impossibility of the effects, done by a human being, are a reminder that a spirit creature we know to have our worst intentions in mind, is far more capable than most people consider.

John LeBlanc
Houston, TX

Although when I perform as a mentalist I seldom do a disclaimer, if need be, I use something that I based upon things that I have heard Kreskin use.

"I am about to perform some things for you that will be very amazing. They are not based upon any kind of supernatural powers, but upon skills that lie innate within all of us. I have simply, through years of practice and self-denial, developed them to a very high degree."

The implications of this are really neat. Think about it. Some people will assume that I am referring to the abilities that we have to occasionally sense who it is calling us on the phone. That's not what I'm referring to at all. I'm referring to sleight of hand. And anyone who has ever seen me knows that I have denied myself very little, if anything!

I consistently maintain that what I do is accomplished by "applied psychology, little-known laws of science, and a touch of theatrics."

The use of mentalism and bizarrism to illustrate the subtlety of deception in an 'occult bombarded' society is a valid one for Christian magicians, as well as for secular performers. I am planning a school program along these lines called, "All that Glitters is not Paranormal." The program would include tricks that amaze, without giving explanations, and a few garden-variety mindreading tricks (such as simple psychology-based tricks found in childrens' magic books) that I would actually EXPLAIN to help drive the point home.

And no, I will not be explaining anything beyond the sorts of tricks found in the old Adams EZ-Magic type booklets.

To sum up, I think that demonstrating that the feats of "Psychic Entertainers" are not psychic at all is an important responsibility for the modern Gospel magician.

Steve

I have always had an interest in mentalism and have wrestled with how to present it and not be accredited or even remotely associated with "occult" powers.

Of course, even better would be a way to present a powerful mentalism effect or effects that could be used to convey a gospel type of message.

Mentalism effects can be extremely powerful.
That is why those doing gospel magic are nervous or cautious about doing any of them. We do not want self-attributed powers being a focus or getting in the way of the message.

I think the trick here is to creatively think and imagine ways to employ some of the mentalism techniques, with the full force and power of the effect, yet having the result being whatever message we want to offer and not being about our "powers".

I mean there has got to be other messages besides "if I can fool you so can the devil" or "I am just doing a trick, God knows everything".

Please don't get me wrong, these are valid and important messages to teach but they seem to be the only ones that we can come up with in regards to performing mentalism effects with any kind of purpose as gospel magicians.

Believe me, if my little brain comes up with anything, I will be sharing it here and if anyone else here has alternate applications of mentalism effects, please share with us.

I remain convinced that there is a place for strong mentalism for the gospel performer and for making an impact in a positive way.

GlenD

Mentalism can be great in a comedy routine, because then people are more apt to think it trick, not supernatural ability. Personally, I do the effect first and then tell people that even though it appears I just plucked the thought out of their mind, there is a perfectly logical explination for what occured. I just leave it at that.