Interesting thought...

[Mr.MadMan]

Im currently studying an awesome piece of Mentalism and came across this sentence:

"You must know the presentation so well that you can focus your attention, as needed, on other things..."

Whereas the current mainstream thinking is:

"You must have the mechanics down so well that you devote everything towards your presentation..."

Although the first one does not imply that you have to devote to your sleight of hand it does imply the exact opposite to the second.
So what are your views on the two sentences?

M.

 

[oldavid1]

Can the process be a step from the second sentence to the first sentence?
First practice until you can't get it wrong, then focus on presentation. Memorize your presentation so well that it becomes part of you, then focus on the stimuli from your audience.

 

[Sidekick]

I never EVER try to memorize my presentation, what I do has been said in expert card technique:
I practice the sleight of hand for the first couple of days,
then start add some of my personal touches with the method,
then start writing my script, I memorize it
then come back to it 4 weeks later and anything I remember is in the final performance.

The reason is, if you remember a certain part of your script chances are its really good!
Like a good one liner or something.

So when I perform I mix some impromtu remarks with my script.
This process takes me 2 months.....LEAST.

 

[Chicken]

I'm a follower of the first statement- if you know what each step in the presentation is, where the attention is continually drawn, the audience will follow you and the moves will never be seen. There also won't be any awkward pauses, (like when most card magicians just sit there and riffle their cards, doing "nothing"). Everything will seem natural and justified. So you don't memorize your presentation, but you memorize exactly what you're going to do, when you're going to do it, and where attention is drawn when you're doing it.

 

[D ICE R]

Hey Mikk is that Alchemical Tools?

I think you have asked something similar of me in the past. My answer has changed recently. As I have started to focus on two of the more real aspects of mentalism in hypnosis and readings. These have not much in terms of method however these are so dependant on spectator interaction. By performing these things it has taught me to become more intune with my audience.

This has changed my presentation as a whole, and I am enjoying it a lot more and the audience relates to me more. I guess the basic idea is that you should only have to focus on putting on a good show.

 

[Mr.MadMan]

Hey Mikk is that Alchemical Tools?

No not this time .
It's Boscom Jones' Magick magazine.(which actually isn't a total mentalism driven magazine, it has a fair amount of magic but good non the less!)

@Sidekick, really interesting. I don't have the patience for that , so i usually take my stuff on to the streets or show it to my mates. Really taking it to the real world gives you so much that you really loose about 90% of everything you wrote and gain 100%.

There is a certain knowledge you can only obtain when taking an effect to a very intimate situation.

@Chicken A performance learned by heart is never good. It means you are limiting yourself to the reaction YOU wish the people to be in a certain situation. But to be honest every person is different and every audience is new, so you have to have a substantial amount of room in your presentation to accommodate the reactions you get from people. Say they cry when you want them to laugh, you can't go on with your funny presentation, you have to adapt to the crying scenario.

I have here a nice thought i got from the Exomagic forum's member Harold Ross :

I would say we have a paradox.

We must know our presentation so well that we can adapt it to whatever situation we may find ourselves in. So many times either we mess up or our spectator helper does something out of the ordinary. One of the hardest things my son had to learn when giving a speech in 4-H was if he forgot a phrase or something, just to go on. We have to give the impression that we are in control of the situation. The audience does not know what is going to happen next. In this respect I agree with the first statement.

I also agree with the second statement in that I need to know the mechanics so well that I can focus on the presentation. Being able to quickly adapt is essential. When I am learning a new card trick it is like there is only one way to do it. As I continue to learn and practice it, I learn some alternative options to cover for when things don't go right. Only when I have gotten to the point where I am completely satisfied with my technique, should I attempt to perform the effect.

Yes, I believe both of the statements to be true- a paradox.

M.

 

[cm763]

I'm not sure that I see how these are mutually exclusive events. One can precede the other, sure, but by no means are you limited to "mastering" (whatever your definition of the word may be) just one of them.

 

[Mr.MadMan]

I'm not sure that I see how these are mutually exclusive events. One can precede the other, sure, but by no means are you limited to "mastering" (whatever your definition of the word may be) just one of them.

Exactly you are not limited to one, but it seems that people have come to the conclusion that this is needed. There are clearly two sides, the side who think that slights are needed to be gotten down and thats all and those who see that presentation is everything. In the past few months i have come to the conclusion that both need to co-exist in harmony to get the best effect.

M.