Over the last few days a few posts have inspired me to think about the effects I perform. The threads that made me think about this in particular are; the top five effects thread, AP's one about strong performances and Draven's about the hook, oh and RD Choppers one about power vs skill. Whislt these were all good threads I felt that what I wanted to say never really fit into any of them in particular.
Behind most magic and mentalist effects there is a simple trick. Whilst some of them require quite complex procedures that the audience may never know about the basic method is very simple. Say if we are using just a pass to achieve an ACR even though the audience may not know the exact mechanics the basic method of secretly cutting the pack my be in the minds of the more clued in spectators. This is why we use things like DL's, Tilts the list is endless, but the basic method for most ACR's is that the card is not really going into the centre. The real question is why not? I (and many others) have a good enough pass coupled with misdirection to have an invisible pass. Hell there are hundreds of good covers to make the pass completly invisible, so why do we use the other methods of not actually placing the card into the centre. I feel that the real answer is that it can and often does look a lot cleaner. Which is a prefectly good reason for any performer.
Either way us choose to achieve the effect there is still an element of risk as to getting court. What if we could grantee a method that we cannot get court out on? I know that this sounds like a pipe dream but in reality what if we can do exactly what we say we are. I know that as a fairly large percentage of these forums are limited to cards this can be very difficult. A perfect example would be gambling demonstrations, although most are not really on the 'up and up' they can still be percieved as being (as much as a gambling demo can be). An other more 'magical' presentation would be to watch someone like Darwin Ortiz who obviously to his audience has amazing sleight of hand but that last 15% they cannot really explain from simply watching him.
While cards are great and all they are not my cup of tea so I will use something that I know better than most. Modern Mentalism started when magicians tried to repliecate the success that mediums were achieving by claiming 'real' powers. However billet switching, centre tears and nail and pocket writing all came from these mediums, and not magicians just creating a method from their world to replicate the others. Whislt these methods were essental to both mentalists and mediums alike the primary difference was that to mediums (for the most part) a suspension of belief on their own character. They were using cold reading technequies that magicians were not, and inturn being percieved as being more real.
This is still going on to this day however there are a lot more skeptics now days. Trying to expose the methods however the Dunniger quote is even more turn when working in reverse, when talking about believing in psychics and that for those who believe not explaination is need. Mentalism now days has gone away from simply replicating the shows put on my mediums of the past. If you go to see a mentalist you expect to see something like drawing dupes, booktests and chair routines. If you went to see a medium what would you see? Nothing more than a Q&A act but the audience is made up of believers. Everyone at the mediums show would believe every word said wereas (most) mentalists audiences will be made up of people who give the classic magician explaination something clever happened I am not sure what happend but I know it did.
Now onto my methods;
In my new show there are two halves, the first is a demonstration of applied psychology and the second is more or less a demonstration of a supernatral power. I have a lot of really methods in the first half Prevaricator, genuine suggestion but still a back up with more mechinical methods to be used to achieve the effect or atleast save it. The presentation for this half is very well scripted to heighten the talents that I am demonstrating and at the same time hiding the real method. The second half, however, although looking more 'real' it is actually more real aswell. The effects that I am demonstrating are waking hypnosis, muscle reading and one other that I will be keeping close to my chest. While I do have back ups for all these effects I know that I will not need them.
I want my preformances to not only feel as real as possible but to be as real as possible. I feel that if we want to progress we should be not only looking for presentations that are as real as possible but also the methods are as real as possible. Because getting caught out doing the real thing is not a bad thing.
Behind most magic and mentalist effects there is a simple trick. Whilst some of them require quite complex procedures that the audience may never know about the basic method is very simple. Say if we are using just a pass to achieve an ACR even though the audience may not know the exact mechanics the basic method of secretly cutting the pack my be in the minds of the more clued in spectators. This is why we use things like DL's, Tilts the list is endless, but the basic method for most ACR's is that the card is not really going into the centre. The real question is why not? I (and many others) have a good enough pass coupled with misdirection to have an invisible pass. Hell there are hundreds of good covers to make the pass completly invisible, so why do we use the other methods of not actually placing the card into the centre. I feel that the real answer is that it can and often does look a lot cleaner. Which is a prefectly good reason for any performer.
Either way us choose to achieve the effect there is still an element of risk as to getting court. What if we could grantee a method that we cannot get court out on? I know that this sounds like a pipe dream but in reality what if we can do exactly what we say we are. I know that as a fairly large percentage of these forums are limited to cards this can be very difficult. A perfect example would be gambling demonstrations, although most are not really on the 'up and up' they can still be percieved as being (as much as a gambling demo can be). An other more 'magical' presentation would be to watch someone like Darwin Ortiz who obviously to his audience has amazing sleight of hand but that last 15% they cannot really explain from simply watching him.
While cards are great and all they are not my cup of tea so I will use something that I know better than most. Modern Mentalism started when magicians tried to repliecate the success that mediums were achieving by claiming 'real' powers. However billet switching, centre tears and nail and pocket writing all came from these mediums, and not magicians just creating a method from their world to replicate the others. Whislt these methods were essental to both mentalists and mediums alike the primary difference was that to mediums (for the most part) a suspension of belief on their own character. They were using cold reading technequies that magicians were not, and inturn being percieved as being more real.
This is still going on to this day however there are a lot more skeptics now days. Trying to expose the methods however the Dunniger quote is even more turn when working in reverse, when talking about believing in psychics and that for those who believe not explaination is need. Mentalism now days has gone away from simply replicating the shows put on my mediums of the past. If you go to see a mentalist you expect to see something like drawing dupes, booktests and chair routines. If you went to see a medium what would you see? Nothing more than a Q&A act but the audience is made up of believers. Everyone at the mediums show would believe every word said wereas (most) mentalists audiences will be made up of people who give the classic magician explaination something clever happened I am not sure what happend but I know it did.
Now onto my methods;
In my new show there are two halves, the first is a demonstration of applied psychology and the second is more or less a demonstration of a supernatral power. I have a lot of really methods in the first half Prevaricator, genuine suggestion but still a back up with more mechinical methods to be used to achieve the effect or atleast save it. The presentation for this half is very well scripted to heighten the talents that I am demonstrating and at the same time hiding the real method. The second half, however, although looking more 'real' it is actually more real aswell. The effects that I am demonstrating are waking hypnosis, muscle reading and one other that I will be keeping close to my chest. While I do have back ups for all these effects I know that I will not need them.
I want my preformances to not only feel as real as possible but to be as real as possible. I feel that if we want to progress we should be not only looking for presentations that are as real as possible but also the methods are as real as possible. Because getting caught out doing the real thing is not a bad thing.
