"So What?" in Mentalism

[Toby]

In the magic world, one of the biggest issues that I used to come up with is the "so what?" question. That is one of the first questions I ask myself when learning a new magic trick. So what if I can make a card jump to the top, so what if I can make 4 coins gather under the same card, so what if I can cut a rope and then restore it, etc...
This is of course from the audiences point of view. It's entertaining, sure, but why not be entertaining and meaningful?
I bet that jugglers have this issue all the time. It's nearly impossible to make juggling meaningful. So what if you can juggle 12 balls on fire while riding a unicycle on an elephants back? It's entertaining, but that's it.
Now we come to mentalism... So what if I can guess what you drew, so what if I knew upfront what object you would choose, so what if I can muscle read where you hid the lighter, etc... Mentalism has one downfall to magic and juggling, it's that it is rarely entertaining. Magic and juggling can at least be visual, so it's like watching an action movie. Action movies are rarely meaningful but they're fun to watch. Mentalism is like a good drama, where the movie lasts for 3 hours, and has this dark deep story that you really have to understand and it all only pays off in the end, if you make it there. At least that's the way I see it.
Sure, mentalism can be entertaining and meaningful to the one spectator that is your subject, but it's pretty boring to the rest of the audience, especially if they don't care what is going on. People don't care about the "glowing dancing canes" either, but at least it's fun.
So what I'm asking here is how can we make mentalism entertaining and more meaningful for others, not just our subject? And so what if I know your dog's name that you only wrote on the back of a business card?

 

[Craig Browning]

Any of the variety arts can be boring, dull, terrible. . . IT'S THE PERFORMER THAT MAKES THE DIFFERENCE, it's not the art form. But too, we need to look at the venue; many will try forcing their particular specialty onto an audience that's not the least interested. Mentalism, especially the intellectual approach to said craft, is a turn off to many in that it threatens either their own sense of intelligence or worse, it threatens one's faith/belief system (the latter being quite popular amongst performers now days). If the performer takes the "darker" more esoteric route of presentation he/she runs the risk of being seen as "demonic" by some but still interesting enough for the curious that want a better understanding about the surreal.

"Entertaining" Mentalism usually means that the performer injects levity into what he/she is presenting and there is a great deal of that, that exists within Mentalism itself, just watch video of Bob Cassidy sometime; Bob delivers a fun and amusing style of Mind Reading where Max Maven offers "Mental Ticklers" as I call them; it's Mentalism but with a big stage production frame work in many cases. I was even guilty of this for a while, incorporating grand illusion technology to a Metaphysical theme, and though it worked it was impractical and too, people saw it as being trickery, which is the last thing a Mentalist wants, so it was back to a slip of paper, some pencils and using my brain to make things happen.

SHOWMANSHIP is what makes those physical ingredients fun, intriguing, and mesmerizing a.k.a. ENTERTAINING. We get there by way of schooling and doing; formal training when it comes to stage, speaking, how to stand and block out an act, scripting & in our case "Linguistics" (Wonder Words). Experience is however, the primary ingredient and not all of us have youth & sex appeal going for us such as we just saw with Colin Keys on AGT; a lot of us have a far more "normal" build and suffer from Geekitis when it comes to being the classic "chubby", bearded, unkempt wonder even when we think we've prepared for doing a show. We invoke excuses such as "it's my persona" while not recognizing that such images HURT and even turn off an audience rather fast. . . the same can be say for those that are too pretentious when wearing a suit or worse, a tux. . . the "Talking Head" types that act as if they are the smartest creatures on the planet and treat their audiences as if they are all idiots. . . we see it a lot these days and it's NOT "entertaining"

So How Do WE Fix It?

We must be honest with one another when it comes to the quality of a performance but we must be big enough (professional enough) to take the critique in the spirit that it's offered and grow by it. Far too many of us won't listen to direction in that we are deluded by the idea of being "artists" and thus, failing to understand that show biz requires many different artists working together in order to make a master piece tangible. That requires consistency vs. changing up on a show every month or even annually . . . create a show and work it!

Take a look at the most successful performers out there. Most all of them started with a basic show premise that they spent a good year or two knocking out all the weak spots and rounding; THAT is why they are successful and why they get gigs at top dollar consistently; talent buyers know what they are going to get up front but more so, they know that the audience is going to be ENTERTAINED by that performer or team.

Sadly, some of us aren't great show people; we simply don't have what it takes to be on stage no matter how much we love the idea of doing such. . . I've seen some of the 20th century's greatest innovators do "shows" and they sucked as showmen though the magic they demonstrated was gorgeous. . . technicians rarely make great showmen however; there are exceptions but most of them started by working competitions and amusement parks for a year or two. . . they "earned their chops" as the old timers used to say.

Bottom line is, it's not Mentalism that is boring but the performers that get borish.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

In the magic world, one of the biggest issues that I used to come up with is the "so what?" question. That is one of the first questions I ask myself when learning a new magic trick. So what if I can make a card jump to the top, so what if I can make 4 coins gather under the same card, so what if I can cut a rope and then restore it, etc...
This is of course from the audiences point of view. It's entertaining, sure, but why not be entertaining and meaningful?
I bet that jugglers have this issue all the time. It's nearly impossible to make juggling meaningful. So what if you can juggle 12 balls on fire while riding a unicycle on an elephants back? It's entertaining, but that's it.
Now we come to mentalism... So what if I can guess what you drew, so what if I knew upfront what object you would choose, so what if I can muscle read where you hid the lighter, etc... Mentalism has one downfall to magic and juggling, it's that it is rarely entertaining. Magic and juggling can at least be visual, so it's like watching an action movie. Action movies are rarely meaningful but they're fun to watch. Mentalism is like a good drama, where the movie lasts for 3 hours, and has this dark deep story that you really have to understand and it all only pays off in the end, if you make it there. At least that's the way I see it.
Sure, mentalism can be entertaining and meaningful to the one spectator that is your subject, but it's pretty boring to the rest of the audience, especially if they don't care what is going on. People don't care about the "glowing dancing canes" either, but at least it's fun.
So what I'm asking here is how can we make mentalism entertaining and more meaningful for others, not just our subject? And so what if I know your dog's name that you only wrote on the back of a business card?

You make it meaningful and entertaining by including everyone and being entertaining.

Bottom line is, it's not Mentalism that is boring but the performers that get borish.

This is so on spot.

Another thing that Craig didn't entirely mention is that not only do some performers try to shoehorn their 'art' into the wrong venue, some performers refuse to accept that maybe they shouldn't be doing what they are doing. This is where creating a good character that suits the performer along with establishing an internal consistency with the tricks performed comes in.

Here's a couple examples. Back when I started doing magic I got a spot busking at a local farmer's market every week. I wrote a show that would last about 15 minutes, to me was funny and packed with magic. I got out there and did my absolute best to do some classic magic that drew people in and made them laugh and got money out of them. Turns out, I'm a pretty crap busker. It's not my scene, and that's not my style of magic. I can't do it - it just doesn't fit me. I'm not loud, I'm not boisterous. While I like to think I'm quick witted and can come up with jokes, I can't get the crowd charged up and feeding me the energy I need to do that. On the other hand, I can take a coin and bend it and have that be a 5 minute piece that has everyone's eyes with ten feet glued to what's going on.

However, you take my buddy Kyle. Excellent entertainer, funny, quick with the jokes. He's a great busker. Fearless when it comes to performing, can pull tricks out of anywhere for days on end. If he just practiced giving hat lines he could probably make a good living from busking alone. But! when he tries to do mentalism it makes me cringe. He boshes right through it like a magic trick. It's something we've spent hours talking about.

So if one is getting poor reactions out of the material being performed, then one has to examine the material and the performance. What is it that is being done that makes others bored? How can you draw people in? Some of this is just pure social dynamics and how to command people's attention and direct it where you want it to be. Sometimes it can be as easy as stepping near someone and saying, "Look at that ... that's incredible ... watch, it's bending right in her hand!" or whatever. Just experiment and make sure everyone is focused and involved.

 

[Toby]

You make it meaningful and entertaining by including everyone and being entertaining.

Great, thanks.

Craig, I agree with you, it's entertainer that makes it entertaining. However, my question is not how to make it more entertaining, but more meaningful for other spectators, not just the subject. I only used entertainment factor to point out why magic doesn't need to be meaningful (even though it's much better when it is). You can walk in the middle of the magic trick and still get something out of it, which is not the case with mentalism in general.

Magicians are always trying to justify their actions. Why are you putting the card in the middle of the deck, only to have it on top again? Why are you mixing the cards face up and face down, only to have them facing the same way again? So what if you can do that? That is my question with mentalism...

So what that you can read someones mind? So what if you can guess/predict their drawing? So what if you know the exact amount of change in someones pocket? So what that you can do that? I'm trying the best I can to get my point across since English is not my first language. But I'm pretty sure you understand what I'm trying to say.

The "problem" with magic is that it is mostly about the magician and what HE can do, so why would audience care about it? Well I find the same in mentalism, even though you're involving your spectator much more than in magic, it's still about what YOU can do. So how do we make it a bit more about THEM then US?

One example I can think of is when this guy I saw on youtube asked a girl to think of one thing that scares her the most, about her deepest phobia. She wrote what that phobia is on a billet which she kept in her hand. Then the mentalist started using pseudo hypnosis and NLP to help her get rid of the phobia, and in the end when she opened the billet, it was blank, the phobia was gone. She started crying. That's a billet switch that is ALL about HER. So what other examples can we think of to make it more about them then us?

Christopher, coin bend is still a MAGIC trick, in my book at least. The fact that you're using your mind instead of your fingers or whatever to bend the coin, doesn't change the fact that coin is visually bending. That is more of a magical moment than mentalism moment. Of course that everyone was watching so intently, it's the same with visual magic. So how can we get that same attention with drawing duplication or a book test? And still make it about them?

 

[Steerpike]

The "problem" with magic is that it is mostly about the magician and what HE can do, so why would audience care about it? Well I find the same in mentalism, even though you're involving your spectator much more than in magic, it's still about what YOU can do. So how do we make it a bit more about THEM then US?

That's one reason all mentalists should know how to cold read. Cold reading is a demonstration by the performer, but it's distinctly about someone else and (generally) trying to make them feel good about themselves. That's one of the reasons I make it a point to contextualize my readings based on the signals people give off through nonverbal communication, visual cues, etc. I tell them these good things about them, and explain that they project to the world that they're that kind of person.

One example I can think of is when this guy I saw on youtube asked a girl to think of one thing that scares her the most, about her deepest phobia. She wrote what that phobia is on a billet which she kept in her hand. Then the mentalist started using pseudo hypnosis and NLP to help her get rid of the phobia, and in the end when she opened the billet, it was blank, the phobia was gone. She started crying. That's a billet switch that is ALL about HER. So what other examples can we think of to make it more about them then us?

That sounds like a variation on one of Sean Fields' old routines from Explicit Content. Sean has gone through a lot of trouble to make mentalism more than just a lecture, though some of his stuff could be more easily described as mental magic. Hey, at least he's thinking of this stuff.

Christopher, coin bend is still a MAGIC trick, in my book at least. The fact that you're using your mind instead of your fingers or whatever to bend the coin, doesn't change the fact that coin is visually bending. That is more of a magical moment than mentalism moment. Of course that everyone was watching so intently, it's the same with visual magic. So how can we get that same attention with drawing duplication or a book test? And still make it about them?

Visuals are only one way to do it. There are others. Kenton Knepper has a book called Secret Scent-sations all about using smell in magic and mentalism.

In fact... an interesting thought just occurred to me. There's a scientific experiment that's still relatively unknown by the larger public. Subjects were given a dish of gelatin that was flavored (for example) cherry, but colored yellow. They were not told what flavor the gelatin was. All of them said after tasting it that they believed the flavor was lemon, rather than cherry. Their brain saw a specific color and decided that it had to be a flavor associated with that color. So it actually deliberately and unconsciously misinterpreted the taste as lemon even though it was obviously cherry just to maintain consistency between the sensory input and expectations.

Now imagine a telepathy routine. A married couple is brought on stage and asked which of the two of them is more extroverted and outgoing. They are seated at a small table and blindfolded. Two dishes of gelatin are brought out. One is red-colored, and the other yellow. Both are cherry however. The red one is placed in front of the more extroverted one, and the yellow in front of the other. They are asked to taste the gelatin and say aloud what flavor they believe it is. They will naturally both say the same thing. When the blindfolds are removed, they see the sight of two completely different colored gelatins just like the audience. The mentalist explains that more outgoing people tend to subconsciously influence the perceptions and decisions of others around them.

Workable? Obviously it needs testing and polish. That's just the first thing that popped into my head. But messing with sensory perception in such a manner and framing it as a pseudo-psychic phenomena could be a very interesting test that also puts more focus on the volunteers.

Admittedly part of the idea came from the comic Gunnerkrigg Court. One of the supporting characters has the ability to unconsciously impose order on the world around him. As a demonstration he throws a deck of cards over his shoulder, and the cards land in a perfect stack in numerical and color order.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Christopher, coin bend is still a MAGIC trick, in my book at least. The fact that you're using your mind instead of your fingers or whatever to bend the coin, doesn't change the fact that coin is visually bending. That is more of a magical moment than mentalism moment. Of course that everyone was watching so intently, it's the same with visual magic. So how can we get that same attention with drawing duplication or a book test? And still make it about them?

Actually, the coin bends in their hands due to their energy. Very little of what I do is actually done 'by me'. But I do agree that the coin bend is more mental magic than pure mentalism.

Phrasing it the way I have was done on purpose. It's a fairly simple concept that takes a lot of time and work to actually make happen. Easier said than done, but if you never boil it down to that simple premise you'll never get anywhere.

The first step is creating a hook in your performance. You want everyone in the audience to relate to what you're saying. In PK Touches I talk about the phenomenon of twins, couples or parents & their children feeling sympathetic sensations. The child is out and about and suddenly the mother just knows something is wrong. The girlfriend bumps their head, the boyfriend gets a headache, etc. Something along these lines has happened to almost everyone, it's an extremely easy to relate to it. Therefore, everyone can put themselves into the position of the people on stage. Then it's enhanced by the reactions of those volunteers. They are amazed, the people in the audience are already relating to them, so the audience is amazed.

The other thing to do is to do things that involve the entire audience every now and then. Alain Nu's Psychochronetic is excellent and involves everyone. Paul Voodini does a drawing duplication that involves everyone in the room. Hypnosis can entertain an entire room easily. Readings always hook a lot of people because there are two things that interest almost everyone: Themselves, and personal information about others. Otherwise known as gossip. Not only that, if you're doing a Q&A style thing everyone's wondering if they will be the next one.

Learning to entertain while you do more focused effects is crucial as well. Learn when you can pop in a joke that makes everyone laugh. Don't get so focused that you forget about the rest of the audience unless you can turn that into a way to build suspense. I think of it like spinning plates In the audience, there are several plates spinning, as well as one plate for every volunteer. If you ignore any plate for too long, it stops spinning and falls. But if you occasionally give each plate a little push, it'll keep going.

 

[Craig Browning]

Christopher & Steerpike have touched on a few things I wanted to say but I do want to touch on a few other points. . .

The "problem" with magic is that it is mostly about the magician and what HE can do, so why would audience care about it? Well I find the same in mentalism, even though you're involving your spectator much more than in magic, it's still about what YOU can do. So how do we make it a bit more about THEM then US?

For starters any Mentalist that makes the show about his/her self should be run off the stage, that is NOT what Mentalism is and it is an ego trip that has been long passe for over 50 years that I'm aware of. Our goal today is to reveal how "user friendly" mentalism/PSI is in the hands of the public -- we are delivering an "Psychic Experience" to people, not a show case in which the theme is "Look at Me". If we are not putting the power & potential into the hands of the laity we've got it all wrong. It is this disconnect that has hurt Mentalism off and on for a very long time and one of the things I tend to ***** about a lot. . . the guys that buy effects not because of how they will support their existing claim but rather how it makes them look -- that classic X-Men/ James Bond sort of fantasy that males, in particular, have a penchant towards (we like stuff!)

Key & Silverware Bending may have distant roots in traditional magic but it was a kid from Israel that capitalize on it and turned it into a Psychic Sensation and thus, it will be inextricably linked to the PSI element. . . go to a Psychic Fair and try not finding someone talking about PK/TK phenomena, and it can be traced straight back to Uri. Unfortunately magicians and their lack of respect for mentalism and related effects, have belittled the demonstration just as they have Smash & Stab, the Mental Epic and more recently Book Tests (especially MoABT, which they've done to death). With the loss of the old Brick & Mortar shop and the crusty old timers that ran them, we have blurred the lines that separated the various niches of the Magical arts and the result has been abysmal if you were to ask both, a yesteryear mage or same era Mind Reader. Kids even address escapes as the would sponge bunnies in that they fail to understand the psychology behind them and the fact that real escape work can get you killed when you think it's just a trick.

Granted, I'm on that old trek about the only thing that's wrong with magic are all the magicians involved with it and how I.B.M. stands for I Bother Magicians (every kid with a card thinks it's a backstage pass and permission to touch every expensive stuff that they didn't pay for).

So long as the magic scene clings to and justifies this "greed" -- the faux belief that they are allowed to infringe upon the related arts and not pay heed to the rules, we will constantly find poor showmanship and quality in shows, bar none! There is a right way to go about doing things and we are deceiving ourselves when we think that creativity doesn't work with rules and discipline.

Where I do lean more on the Old School side of things when it comes to Mentalism I understand and have borrowed from the New School format a few times, when trying to educate the public on specific issues (especially psychic fraud but likewise, Mental Development such as Memory, Concentration, actual Thought, etc.) in that the New School/Dunninger approach is more appropriate for such demonstrations. Even here however, creating levity and an environment that allows guests to participate and enjoy themselves is the objective, NOT SHOWING OFF.

Bob Cassidy is not abash to point out that too many of today's wannabe Mentalists attempt to do too much rather than sticking with a single claim, failing to understand how this makes them look like a total fake and a cheap shyster. "Less is More!" In Bob's case his only claim is to be a Mind Reader, he isn't trying to do or claim Clairvoyance or any of the other stuff, he's a Telepath A-1. That doesn't mean that he hasn't ventured into one or two side experiments here and there, we all can and do. But in the real world, when you are dealing with authentic psychics vs. New Age headline grabbers, such abilities are limited as well; where one person shows strong empathy and intuition another might reveal clairvoyance and be able to "see" the unseeable (when it comes to the typical person).

I'm loosing my thought train but I think I've clarified a few things