Chet's Magical Mysteries

2009-08-06T19:36:00.004-05:00

So it's been three years? Where has the time flown?

Almost two years ago, I managed to completely tear up the cartilage in my left knee. Didn't get anything done for it for about four months. Dumb ol' Chet thought it was just a pulled muscle, but it kept getting worse. So surgery wasn't able to completely fix everything, and I still limp a lot. About March, I started doing diabetes lectures again, though I still couldn't stay standing for too long. Did a couple of magic & mentalism shows, but little ones - where I could stay sitting down.

Now I have a real show coming up next month, and I need to keep on my feet for 50 - 60 minutes. Wish me luck and keep me in your prayers!

But that's not why I came back to this blog.

One thing I'm learning, is that sometimes I need to motivate myself - and I'm more motivated when I've committed myself in public. That way, there's this pressure from friends and family for me to follow through and do what I've promised.

So I'm promising to finish putting together a mentalism show for teenagers, and get into schools, youth centers, whatever it takes - and to use this show to educate them on diabetes prevention and control.

I don't have to tell you that diabetes has reached epidemic proportions. I don't have to tell you how it's harder for young people, because so many of them aren't getting tested, or aren't controlling their diabetes. I think I can reach them, and if I have to sugar-coat the message, I will.

And if I can make this fun, maybe they'll listen - and maybe I'll follow through and get this done.

Hypnosis among Christians

2006-08-21T15:14:00.000-05:00

What seems to be an eternal debate is the question of whether a Christian is for or against hypnosis, as if there was an either/or choice. Catholic doctrine is different from LDS doctrine, Protestant doctrines are different according to which Protestant church you're speaking of. And every person is influenced by custom -- probably more than we're willing to admit.

So I've been asked about the LDS mindset on this. And I begin immediately with the doctrine of agency -- that is, the right and the moral imperitive to choose good over evil. And hypnosis is one of those things which can impair one's agency. Therefore, it's evil -- yes?

Well maybe - and maybe not. Used willy-nilly (and far too many entertainers use it without considering consequences) it can relax inhibitions. And inhibitions are not usually bad things. They're our fuses, our circuit breakers, that help keep us in control when we'd really like to crash (repeatedly) into the car which stole a parking space from us.

Now when someone who knows what they're doing is the hypnotist, when it's someone we trust, it's another (and a particularly powerful) method of relaxation, therapy, or anaesthesia. The only question is really whether the hypnotist is someone we trust.

Certainly, 19th century amusements were not particularly trustworthy. In the August 1981 issue of Tambuli, Brother William Berrett said "This led Brigham Young to say of the hypnotism he saw practiced in his day: 'Hypnotism is an inverted truth; it originated in holy, good, and righteous principles, which have been inverted by the power of the devil.' "

Lee Darrow, instructor for the first ever safety course for hypnotists, consistently campaigns for better training of hypnotists, whether for medical or entertainment purposes. A difficulty is that legislators (much less your average person) don't usually know what hypnotism is.

Richard Osterlind points out that people's feelings about hypnosis has more to do with their local or family customs than with their church's doctrine. In this, I definitely agree. (Besides, you'd be surprised how many people don't know the doctrines of their church.) There's a lot of misinformation which is given out about hypnosis, and local urban myths abound.

We're told that hypnotism can't make you do what you'd normally not do. We're told that hypnosis can cause you to lose your inhibitions and do things you'd normally not want to do. We're told that hypnosis, under a clever hypnotist, can make us do things we'd normally not dream of doing.

Get the facts. Lee's site is a good place to start (There's an extraordinary amount of false information on the internet, but Lee's an unusually straight player.) and he can lead you to further facts. You can probably contact him through his website at http://home.earthlink.net/~mstrhypno/hypno.html

As for us Latter-day Saints (aka Mormons) we're very fond of our agency. We submit to surgeons, therapists, and doctors all the time -- so we're, as a people, not particularly superstitious about hypnosis. But we might be a little suspicious of an entertainer making us dance like a chicken.

Politically Incorrect

2006-08-17T07:27:00.000-05:00

Seems as if too many of these posts are about "what's wrong with magic." This one might well be a "what's wrong with people?"

I've been raked over the coals at a few places on the internet, because I've opposed a point of view which says that exposing other people's acts is just fine, and that bigotry is just fine. Disgarding the out-and-out hate mail, responses I've received are of four types:

1. They don't expose any tricks which aren't theirs. (This is a flat-out falsehood.)

2. They only disagree with certain groups; they're not bigoted. (We'll answer that in a minute.)

3. They do good works.

4. Anyone who points out evil, should practically be shot on sight.

Most of the fuss focuses upon a specific duo because they're currently getting the most attention. But next decade, it'll be some other hate group or celebrity. Past decades have seen momentary popularity of such "icons" as David Duke, the KKK, and Joe McCarthy. Eventually, history blips over the damage they do, but it's murder during the events.

This group for instance, has advocated violence against an entire religion, boasts of having stolen from a charitable organization (and advocates their readers do the same), inspired and encouraged vandalism of a church outside of Anchorage a few years ago --- and we've not even discussed their delight in ruining other people's acts.

As to their good works -- It's awfully Christian to see that they participated in a benefit for a magician who'd been all but destroyed in an auto accident. Despite, as one of their loyal worshippers said, the fact that the injured magician was a Christian. Sometime, we'll talk about the difference between actual self-sacrifice and taking a few hours of one's time. And I certainly hope the benefit didn't expose any of the injured magician's act.

This is the way they want the public to perceive magicians and magic. I'd druther be perceived as a friendly dad & gran'pa who hopes to make life a little easier, a little better for my brothers and sisters. Which means, no matter the money or fame, this gran'pa won't be trying to destroy other people's lives.

Keeping it simple

2006-08-11T17:06:00.000-05:00

It turns out that I may be rather good at this mentalism thing, if reactions from my audiences can be said to be an indicator. And it's gotten me to go back, remember, and re-study theatre lessons of 35 years ago - tempered with the experiences of the past 35 years. I remember that, as young people, we were concerned with "the theatah" -- the art of it all and how we were so much more cultured than the plebes who laid down their money for "our art."

I'm afraid many think only of the "art" of it, and don't consider the craft and vocational portions.

For instance, there's this human tendency to overcomplicate things. A good portion of magic isn't entertainment because the magician complicates things. "Shuffle the deck. Deal 17 cards face down. Look at one. Remember it. Pat your head and rub your tummy." Even before we talk about presentation and interpersonal skills, things aren't looking well.

One of my favorite entertainers/creators frequently says that he can't believe someone didn't invent (fill in the blank) before, because it seems so simple to him. That is, however, a significant indication that something really is a good idea -- if, in retrospect, it seems simple. Jules Fieffer says the creation of Superman was not "an original idea" but something which all the imitators (and millions of customers) responded with "But of COURSE!" (The imitators followed with slapping their foreheads.)

It's easy to admire creators for BEING creators (something I may or may not ever become in magic, but I'm good with that); I also admire this entertainer for his choice to create with intent -- intent FOR the audience's purposes, not necessarily what will make things easier or more impressive for him.

Basing the act on what affects the customer (a term we ought never forget) is our real goal. We don't measure success by how much WE enjoy doing a certain routine. When all is said and done, sometimes the sponge balls get the biggest reactions. Recently, at dinner with my seen-too-much-magic wife, I couldn't help but do the old coin-from-dinner-roll. It doesn't get simpler or easier than that. Yet the woman who is bored with twisted cutlery yelped, stared with her mouth open, then said those wonderful words "How did you DO that?"

Humans haven't changed significantly since the days of Father Adam and Mother Eve, so it makes sense that the classics, the simple-and-direct, still hit the hardest. Richard Osterlind points out how, from twelve notes, an infinite number of diverse compositions are created. Perhaps we should be looking at basic human psychology and the classics of magic and mentalism as the basic notes with which we can create amazement.

It always seemed to me that the most awe-inspiring pieces of classic music were based on very simple arrangements, which could then be taken into many new places.

Of course, I always liked barber shop quartet too, and you don't get much simpler than that!

Back in the saddle again

2006-08-11T16:58:00.000-05:00

Gee, did THIS ever take a long time to come about! Since you last saw me here, I've moved FIVE times by my counting, and we're only going to be at this assignment until September. This is why magazines don't want me to subscribe.

The good news is that my brother did remarkably well on the removal of the dangerous tumor in his neck. The bad news is that he has two more tumors on the other side of his neck. The weird news is that the medical team is waiting 'til September to do anything more with him. So far, so good. Now if only we could get him to stop smoking!

Enough of the personal matters! Skip to the next entry for something about magic!

'Til We Meet Again

2006-04-29T18:13:00.000-05:00

It will be awhile before I can check in here again. I'll be on the road -- I have a house to close up, and a brother who's getting set to have three tumors removed from his neck. So until I return, play safe, look both ways before crossing the street.

And if you smoke, please consider dropping it. I've lost a sister, many friends, and possibly my little brother soon --- thanks to tobacco.

*jeep!
--Chet

Magic on the Menu -- the Lecture!

2006-04-23T19:09:00.000-05:00

There was a legendary magic magazine, which was published especially for the close-up magician. The Magic Menu was its name, and when it vanished, everyone mourned.

But, hark! We have something which appears to be a lost issue of the Magic Menu! "Tips & Tricks for the Professional & Aspiring Restaurant Magician" it's subtitled, and it's available only if you get Jim Sisti to come to your town to lecture.

Well if you have a magic club, an IBM Ring, or an SAM Assembly -- do it! Get Jim to your area, and do buy this book.

Because Jim leads the first half of this book with twelve essays that cover how to get an audition, how to get the job (two separate things), advice on tips (I only slightly disagree with him, but he does have years more experience at this than I), material, problem customers, what types of magic should meet your needs, making sure you keep the job and prosper, and so many more things. This is good advice -- no, this is great advice. And your career will be greater if you heed it.

That's not all. He follows these essays with seven effects which are ideal for walkaround, and geared especially for restaurant settings. Seven all-star creators of these effects: Jim himself, Tom Ladshaw, David Acer, Al the Only, Bert Allerton, Chris Hurlbert, and Tom Mullica. You'd expect great magic from these fellows; you won't be disappointed. The effects aren't complicated, they reset easily, and you'll have no problem with people examining them.

"Transmutation" is changing the volunteered (!) bill from a higher denomination to a lower. And then having the original appear in a coin purse which has been on the table away from your hands all the time.

"Signature Transpo" has your signature and your volunteer's switch from one business card to another - and leaves them with your business card (always a good idea).

"Forget Me Not" is when you sign your Voodoo Business Card -- and your signature flies to a playing card which your volunteer has been holding.

"The Happy Birthday Card Trick" tells us that it "is not a powerful illusion; it is a cutesy trick." When everyone sings "Happy Birthday," you deal the cards to the beat of the song. You land on their chosen card. You flip over the cards you've dealt and there, with a single letter on the back of each card, is spelled out "Happy Birthday!"

"The Two-Card Trick" has two cards mischiveously switching places back and forth between your pocket and the volunteer. But that's OK, because you're going to show them how it works.

"The Flushing Joker," like "Happy Birthday," will require a bit of room. You manage to deal yourself a Royal Flush in spades, but can't find the volunteer's card. No problem. A snap of the fingers and you flip the cards over -- to reveal their card's name spelled out on the backs of the cards.

"Torn" is a nice, simple, you-can-do-it-at-the-next-table torn and restored card effect.

Any one of these would be a nice complement to the essays. As it is, you might just have an entire night's act with this. Certainly, you have the makings of a career by following the advice in the essays.

The only thing I'd improve about this book, is I'd like it to come with Jim, demonstrating the effects therein. I've got to move somewhere that he lectures!

Jim Sisti's Mixed Symbols

2006-04-23T19:07:00.000-05:00

There's a card trick as old as the hills, which I think I read in a Martin Gardner book, and that usually means it's so old that it's new again. Not only that, Jim Sisti disguises this principle with flavor and style, and it comes out a mentalism routine. (Some might call it mental magic, but I shan't quibble.)

It starts like a card trick, and this can lead your volunteer into a false sense of security. But the cards are ESP cards, and they're jumbo sized. Not super-jumbo, but large enough to create a sense of discontinuity in their hands.

I'll describe the effect as the documentation describes it, then I'll describe what the volunteer seems to remember. They are two different things.

"EFFECT - The performer hands five ESP cards, each bearing a different symbol, to a spectator and requests that he remember one. The spectator is then asked to shuffle the cards. The magician takes the cards back and, after an apparently fair mixing procedure, correctly divines the selected symbol without even looking at the faces."

WHAT THEY SEEM TO REMEMBER: The performer hands five cards to me and I remember one. Then I shuffle them. Then he shows me which one I was thinking of.

Yes, I tried this a few times -- including one time with someone who was familiar with the aforementioned "old trick." In this new guise, it flew right past him. When I recapped "Now, you thought of one of these symbols. You shuffled and mixed up these cards. Now - let me see your eyes...." they believed what I said. They forgot or ignored - or SOMETHING - that I had taken the cards back at one point.

It's a simple routine, and an effective one. Jim even manages to get all the instructions in fewer than two 5 1/2 x 8 pages (we've known since the days of Magic Menu that he knows the value of conciseness). I don't have the slightest idea how much Jim charges for this. It's available only at his lectures, which would be well worth attending at any rate. If he comes through your town, don't miss him -- and don't miss this routine.

_________________
*jeep!
--Gran'pa Chet
"If ya thinks ya is right, ya deserfs credit. Even if ya is wrong." --Gus Segar (through Popeye)

Why Paint Magic as Evil?

2006-04-22T15:30:00.000-05:00

How many times have I seen some "magician" joyfully exclaim that "they thought I'd sold my soul to Satan"? Wayne Houchin makes this infantile boast on his Stigmata DVD; others proclaim that their routines convince people they're possessed or otherwise evil. And then they complain that people aren't more accepting of magic, that "those superstitious hicks" are offended by magicians, and don't see our craft as an art.

Are they mad?

Not only are they glorifying in being perceived as evil, they're upset that their audiences don't rejoice in perceiving them as evil.

And they have this rash assumption (carried over from Faustian literature) that Satan is someone who can grant great power, that he has great power which can be bestowed, and that (somehow) Heavenly Father is helpless against it. (This carries over to the idea that someone could be possessed against their will.)

In another time, another place -- are these the people who would try to conquer populations by fear and intimidation, with smoke, mirrors, and terror?

Our vocation/avocation will always be mistrusted as long as there are people who abuse it.

*jeep!
--Gran'pa Chet

An Entertainer Entertains

2006-04-17T10:58:00.000-05:00

I just spent another hour being highly entertained and didn't even notice the time passing. Glenn Bishop has added a number of fun videos to his site (see the link over in the right column of the main page of this hyar blog) and I'm still tingling from the sheer fun of it all. There's a couple of clips with him performing effects on Chicago television of a few years back, and I got a real kick out of the befuddlement of the TV personality trying to follow that elusive pea under three shells. And then Glenn pulled out bottlecaps and did it again -- the poor chap was completely lost and astounded.

My favorite happens to be his rendition of the cups & balls. I really like the fact that Glenn goes right back to the classics here -- the Vernon influence is obvious and acknowledged. But it's Glenn's relationship that he builds with the spectator that makes this a real winner. In lesser hands, these same words might very well make the fellow watching him (right there at Glenn's fingertips!) feel like a fool, and become resentful. Instead, the guy is very amused and entertained (there's that word again) and ends up shaking his head after the entire piece (which includes some linking rings) is finished.

Glenn frequently feels he has to step up and defend himself, since he gets attacked on various boards. I say he doesn't have to defend himself -- just put up links to these video clips.

But that's not why I called you all here today.

No, I convened this meeting to talk about a DVD which I wanted to review more than a year ago. But at that time, Glenn pulled it off the market and it just didn't make sense to raise interest in a non-existent product.

What I'm talking about is Glenn Bishop's Tested Tricks for Tableside Tricksters. No card tricks -- "just" a scam, a fooler, and some real magic. At least, it looks real!

It's been said, by no less than Bill Palmer, that no one does the 3 Shell Game better than Glenn -- you read about the TV clip of it just a few paragraphs ago -- and Glenn offers us a chance to do it just as well. I will admit that Glenn performs better in front of an audience than he does for a cold, lone camera -- so do watch the aforementioned clip. If you want the sort of reactions that you see Glenn get, then you'll want his explanation -- with his little subtleties. It's worth mentioning that he's been doing this routine since he was eight years old. We might not ever get quite as good as this boy.

Coins to Glass follows and, if you've much history in your blood, you won't be wondering how he does it. This is, after all, an old routine. But you'll be wondering how he does it so well and so smoothly. And part of it, is that Glenn suckers you. Once he has you positive that you know how he's doing it and what he's doing -- he proves that it couldn't be that way after all. In this, it reminds me very much of Michael Ammar's Incredible Coins Across which makes it VERY obvious how the coins are moving across - and then reality is yanked out from under you. Glenn's "Coins to Glass" is very much like that. And nice and noisy -- which makes it great for trade shows!

I absolutely LOVE Leipzig's Pride! The spectator sees - and feels -- the coins go right through her hand. This is also known as "Cap & Pence" if you're trying to look it up. There was some clunkiness in Leipzig's handling (Hard to believe, isn't it?) which Glenn cleans up admirably.

Now -- the Cups & Balls. You might guess how much I love Glenn's version of this wonderful classic. (Yes, Glenn does return to the classics, and I do find that admirable. There are reasons, and it has to do with the way these classics affect audiences.) The demonstration suffers from Glenn not having a spectator to act and react with (Which is something at which he excels!) and he makes the moves VERY obvious for teaching purposes. For entertainment value, see the aforementioned TV clip. You'll appreciate the power of this routine much better. Then come back for the explanation - and the ease at which Glenn loads the final loads. I have the feeling that even if he flashed them, his actions seem so normal that no one would notice.

Die Namic Diamonds finishes up the set, and will make you crazy when you watch the demo. It's the paddle move -- with a kicker that you see coming and is irresistable in its inevitability. Your non-magician spectator might not see it coming -- I doubt they will -- but it's equally entertaining either way. Because even if you see it coming, you're thinking "No way! No WAY!!"

And that IS a nice paddle move, by the way.

For this DVD, I can't believe he's selling it for only $20.

What can I say? I need to get more of Glenn's videos. He's fun!

*jeep!
--Gran'pa Chet

Jeep! and Jeep again!

2006-04-06T16:24:00.001-05:00

Someone asked me why I sign my posts here and elsewhere with a merry "jeep!"

Lee Falk used to occasionally stop a story, in his marvelous and widely-imitated adventure strip the Phantom, and recount the character's origins. He captioned this segment "For Those Who Came In Late." As someone who ALWAYS came in late, I always loved these segments.

For Those Who Came In Late, E. C. ("Gus") Segar created probably the best comical adventure strip with Thimble Theatre. It didn't start out as an adventure strip. It was a gag-a-day strip, spoofing silent movie serials, with a cast that included a vile villain (whose name escapes me now), a Hero by the name of Ham Gravy, and the damsel in distress (played by Miss Olive Oyl). Then Olive's brother Castor was introduced, and suddenly wild and wooley adventures were the order of the day.

In 1929, Castor and Ham hired a sailor to run their ship (on the way to break Dice Island). Said sailor's name was Popeye, and within a couple of years Popeye had pretty much taken over the strip.

Segar continued to introduce fantasy characters with strong possibilities for humour. One of the best was Eugene, the magical 4th dimensional jeep. Not only could Eugene predict the future (which was of little help, since all he ever said was "jeep!") but he could petrify sea hags, travel through 3-dimensional space & time, and eat all the orchids Popeye would supply.

And he was good luck, to those who practiced virtue and honesty. (Thus, he wasn't good luck for Wimpy.) So when I was editing a Popeye zine, I began signing my letters with a "jeep!" and a picture of Popeye. Nowadays, I do most of my letter writing on the web, and I can't usually draw a Popeye picture. But I still sign my letters and posts with "jeep!" since it seems to be good luck.

*jeep!
--Gran'pa Chet

Make 'em Beg

2006-04-06T09:49:00.000-05:00

Just got back from the doctor's, where I had to deal with a substitute. (I hate it when my doctor goes on vacation!) He saw my copy of M-U-M ( http://www.magicsam.com/ )and asked if I was a magician. For some reason, I seem to have come up with the perfect answer - at least until someone comes up with a more perfect answer. I said that I perform the splashy magic for the kids, and mind reading & mental work for the grown-ups. This intrigued him, so he all but begged me to show him some proof of my "mental powers." Afterwards, when I was leaving, he was begging me to come to the race track with him. (America has become gambling-addicted, hasn't it?)

Now this doctor's initial reaction when he saw M-U-M was not enthusiastic. As a matter of fact, he sort of contemptuously spoke about a relative who annoyed people with card tricks. Yet immediately after I said That Perfect Answer, he was dying to see some magic. This got me to thinking that there are ways to overcome the initial prejudice against magicians.

Partly, it's how we present it. By distinguishing - in a SHORT answer - differences between kids' magic (which I love; I love the splashy, over-the-top stuff, and I'm good at it) and "grown-up" magic (which I don't perform that differently, but "grown-ups" think I do) he wanted to see what "grown-up" magic was.

I'm also intrigued by how we can tap into specific audiences' expectations. For example, Cherie & I plan to move back to Arkansas or Missouri in the near future. We've tried and tried to get an assignment to St Louis. When we do move back, I plan on taking advantage of the closeness of the Ozarks and all the superstitions and legends with which I'm familiar. I may even present myself as having been trained by one of the old weird women of the mountains. Steve Pellegrino tells me that St Louis tends to perceive magicians as children's entertainers only, but I'll bet they'd react differently to Ozark magic!

And that's a key idea, I think. Find what's in their hearts -- everyone carries some superstition with them. This doctor was a horse race fan, so mentalism really touched his "greedy li'l ol' heart." There's some way of presenting magic to every person, I think.

More on pettiness

2006-04-05T11:15:00.000-05:00

A very few folks have suggested that I talk about Richard Osterlind too much in these entries. Get over it. Since mentalism is a key topic here, it's inevitable. And this is a follow-up to my earlier entry. Steve Pellegrino (Go check his wonderful sites!) dug a little into what the Petty Thieves were saying and doing, and posted, at Mentalist Sanctum, a terrific post that I urge you to go read: http://mentalistsanctum.com/viewtopic.php?t=392&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15
-- and my reply follows below.

Hm, I think I "get it" now, Steve. All this nonsense over the past couple o' years hasn't been an attack on Richard, per se, but an attack on all Richard represents. "Old school" (I don't think Richard OR Jim would be insulted at that term. This is, by the way, the term used for we who still prefer wood axles for our yo-yos.) seems to enrage these frustrated kids. I've seen this in more than one field. (I was attacked VERY strongly by persons at Duncan Toys, re: their "finger" TV commercial.) It's a mark of wannabes, and - as you noted - kids who want to emulate what they see on TV, including the video edits.

Unable to build themselves up, they take the easy road of trying to tear down an obvious symbol of reality - since they're stuck on "unreality." Unable to be good themselves, they're determined to destroy good.

Richard should be flattered. A man is measured not just by the friends he's made, but by the enemies he has. It's like discovering that the Ku Klux Klan has put you on their hate list.

Petty Thieves

2006-04-04T22:46:00.000-05:00

If I ever create something of merit for magic, just shoot me.

You want background? John LeBlanc has background for you. http://www.escamoteurettes.com/blog/index.php?p=295 and it'll take you awhile to read. Richard Osterlind has background too: http://www.osterlindmysteries.com/blog/

What it boils down to, is a little boy who wants his name known. So he steals an effect from a well-known performer and creator. Gives it a different name. Reduces the size of the gimmick. And wonders why people of good taste and decency aren't throwing money at him.

It's no use trying to talk sense to evil little boys. It's not even any use to try to make sense of them.

I've given enough print to this little coward.

Breaking Through the Breakthrough Card System

2006-03-27T13:54:00.000-06:00

OK, the long version of the review. (As the audience runs screaming to the exits!) The official one, the one which I'll post to my blog and (eventually) to the Magic Caffeinated.

Some folks have complained that my reviews are too laden with praise, or that I never seem to turn a critical eye. People whose products I've reviewed know this isn't quite so, but the accusation has a gram of truth in it. I tend to only review products I think are worthwhile, hoping the drek dies in silence. In the past, I've written blistering reviews of some real crud; invariably, sales would increase on said crud. Also invariably, I'd get letters (this was before e-mail) that told me it was just as bad as I'd said, but they had to see for themselves.

To balance all I've written about Richard Osterlind's products, I would be delighted (heh heh heh) to write that something he produced wasn't that good. If he'd only produce something lousy, I wouldn't be faced with this label of being an Osterlind booster. Someday, surely, he's going to miss the mark -- or perhaps he missed it in his early days, and such a thing is no longer available. Someday, he's bound to produce a loser.

But this isn't it. This continues his streak of winners, and is packed densely with thoughts you can use. I don't care if you never "do" mentalism. I don't care if you never pick up a pack of cards. Just learning the thinking behind the movement, the dialogue, the staging, and the type of audience contact -- this will improve your performance significantly, whether you're a magician or a lounge singer.

Michael Ammar said, in a wonderful introduction to a collection of the Magic Menu, that experience is the best teacher and that learning from others' experience enables us to gather more experience than we can in a lifetime. In Mind Mysteries Guide Book 2: the Breakthrough Card System, you can internalize about THIRTY YEARS of hard-won experience. Want to avoid some mistakes -- without making those mistakes (as poor Richard did)?

Richard spends, I feel, entirely too much time justifying the BCS. Why do I say this, when there's only a few paragraphs of defense? Because I feel the BCS requires NO defense. Richard speaks of comparisons people have done between the BCS and memorized decks. I dismiss such comparisons, as being similar to comparing the Zig-Zag Girl with Sawing a Woman in Half. The BCS is a prop - an excellent prop - to make you a mind reader, a precognitator, and a mental wizard. And the real secrets aren't in the prop, but in its use.

To absolutely prove this, Richard takes us step by step through each routine on the DVD of the same name (available separately). In each instance, he shows us how - through meticulous detail - how to focus on the effect itself. And the effect is NOT "pick a card/I name your card." The effects are:

- You get inside someone's mind, and see through their eyes.
- You determine what they've put in their pockets -- even when THEY don't know.
- You invade - INVADE, mind you! - someone's private thought. And you don't use any "Is your card in this bunch? Is it in this bunch?" routine. No, you just KNOW.
- You do this again --- but this time, even your volunteer doesn't know what card they've picked and put back in the deck.
- You demonstrate, conclusively, that you're the Number One Blackjack Player of All Time -- and that no one's thoughts are safe from you. You don't just demonstrate this. You actually prove that you're dangerous, and that casinos fear you.

Presentation. Technique. Subtext. Which of these are more important? In Osterlind's world, they are not separated; each is blended into the other.

Is there a problem with using cards in mentalism? Osterlind shoots that superstition down. Not just in an essay, but by deed. And if there was any doubt, a new routine is introduced:

A Poker Demonstration. Now anyone who plays poker with a mind reader is a fool, we know that. But Osterlind doesn't show himself as a mind reader in this demonstration. As a matter of fact, there's only one way to describe what he does in this demonstration -- because it's not a "I know what your hand is," it's a "I control reality and how it unfolds" incident. That word is "magician" -- in its literal meaning. Demonstrating this game, you can weaken it and say "This is how card cheats do it." Or you can weaken it and say "Mind readers have this advantage in card games." Or you can just do it - without explanation - and creep everybody out. Heck, I've tried it and it creeps ME out!

This is actually a weak review. I could make this much longer, I could edit this down and make it more concise, and I could certainly tell more about the strengths of this book.

But I'm too stunned right now, just from reading it. And from watching the DVD while reading it - which creates a whole new experience. I am beginning to see why Janelle, an audience member on the DVDs, never seems to be able to come out of shock.

$25 from www.osterlindmysteries.com -- What a ridiculously low price for solid gold!

The Bishop Moves Diagonally

2006-03-21T20:07:00.000-06:00

Glenn Bishop did me the great honor of listing me as an interesting link on his blog. This surprised me, mostly because I thought that Glenn had ended his blog. I am overjoyed to see it back and Glenn actively involved in communicating with his fans and peers.

Glenn is one of those people who always has a great story to tell, who knows his history, and has been able to make an audience absolutely stunned while they love him to pieces. It's a rare talent. And I enjoy reading whatever he writes. It's not easy sometimes - Glenn has dyslexia, so it's not easy for him to write it. But it's always worth any struggle (Is it "i" before "e" except after "c" or when sounded like "a" as in "sleighbells" or "neigh"?) because he's always so darned interesting.

I have two of his DVD tutorials and, though they're pared to the minimum required to teach the routines, they surely keep me entertained.

He is also one of those people that internet kids just love to beat up on. I don't know why some people attract this sort of abuse, but Glenn's one of them. Every so often, he figures he's had enough and walks away from the 'net. We're very lucky that he decided to come back.

There's a technique he's been teaching that has card people all a'twitter. It's called the Punch Deck and I have to confess that I have no idea what it is or what it's used for. But from some of the descriptions I've heard from some people who know cards, it's a powerful piece of ammunition in their arsenal now. Glenn seems to be the acknowledged master of this technique, or at least the acknowledged master of teaching it.

But me? I'm still struggling with my double lifts. This is WAY beyond my skill levels!

a Sanctum for Mentalists

2006-03-02T15:44:00.000-06:00

Did you ever check Steve's blog, linked over at the right? If so, you're at least aware of his service to mentalism. That service goes by the name of the Mentalist Sanctum, and it's a forum where you must convince Steve that you're serious about mentalism and about contributing, constructively, to the forum. This has - so far - eliminated the in-fighting and childishness which has been destroying the Magic Cafe lately, and which bored me away from the Ellusionist forums prior to that. I hesitate to recommend it, because I'd prefer it stay small and exclusive. So forget you ever read this.

This post is a little late being posted, because I'm recovering from a bout of food poisoning. I've been meaning to write a piece about my pseudo-job of going around lecturing on diabetes. If I don't get around to that for a few days (You DON'T want me going into detail about why I'm not sitting in front of the computer so much) I'd still like to encourage anyone with diabetes to contact me. We with diabetes should be living longer and healthier than our neighbors without diabetes.

Linkish Links

2006-02-21T22:01:00.000-06:00

It was with a little thrill that I learned John LeBlanc (no relation to the Suspense radio episode) included a link to this li'l blog on his website. It seemed only fair that I do the same, that is - list his also. This meant I needed to do at least a cursory reading of his blog, which I did, and found it entertaining and informative. What's more, I didn't find any obscenities in it, which means I can recommend it. You'll find it listed to the right with some highfalutin' French name (Escamoteurettes) which means John has something to say. He's one of the people who really think through mentalism, and has led some mighty interesting discussions.

Since I was re-doing the blog page's template anyway, I thought I'd include a few more sites which are dear to my heart.

Richard Osterlind is a good friend and arguably the greatest mentalist since Joseph Dunninger. His site is listed, and if you dig into the "magicians" section, you'll find not only a store, but his blog. Said blog includes some of the best ideas and applications which your everyday entertainer could hope for; the store -- well, I'd just as soon you not buy anything from him. That way, I get to hog it all.

Steve Pellegrino runs Magicentric, and his are opinions which the amateur and professional should heed. What I really like about Steve is that he can make mistakes, admit them, apologize, and press on. In a business fraught with egos, that makes him quite unique. Plus which, his entries are always entertaining, usually informative, and frequently outlandish. You'll love it.

Meridian Magazine is my favorite on-line magazine, and can wring a smile out of the most depressing day. It's not rose-coloured glasses either; sometimes it cuts to the quick. And I really miss Jack Anderson's editorial hand; he was one of the hardest-hitting reporters of the past 40-50 years and the world is poorer without him.

Google News is just a convinient place to find the local news.

Inside the Mind of Richard Osterlind

2006-02-12T22:17:00.000-06:00

The following review first appeared in the Mentalist Sanctum, a friendly forum for mentalists by Steve Pellegrino:

MIND MYSTERIES GUIDE BOOK VOL ONE by Richard Osterlind

Since this is a much more user-friendly forum, I'll be able to speak more freely. (Right. Like anything on the 'net is truly secure!) Here I can clearly state that I've been looking for something like this for a long, long time.

Let's first address cost and value. The book is $25. It's 71 pages, counting cover, copyright, and some white space. Its value may not match the price if you own the [i]Mind Mysteries Vol 1[/i] DVD. If these are your feelings or thoughts, I strongly urge you to [i]not [/i]buy this book. You may not be ready for it. Heck, [i]I[/i] may not be ready for it!

Value... That can be an intangible. Let's say you're a performer. Maybe not even a full-time entertainer; let's say you do this part-time.

Now let's say you have opportunity for some up-close advice from a successful entertainer who's put a lot of notches on his belt. Step-by-step advice. Someone who opens up the techniques and psychology. Someone who shares what works, what doesn't work, and what it took him trial-and-error over a 35-year period to learn.

How much value do you put on such a manuscript? How much can it help your career?

Because that's the bottom line, isn't it? Will it help you become a better mentalist? Will it enable you to "get that big break" -- a TV spot or an agency to sign you?

Well maybe. They say half of success is to be ready when opportunity knocks at your door. In this case, to be ready to become the best possible mysterian you can be.

Because that's what you'll be if you study -- really study -- this book. If you bought the DVD, you bought what Richard calls his "money act" -- the act with which he puts food on the table. And with this book, you take advantage of 35 years of testing this material in front of tough audiences. More than 35 years of experience -- you also get to learn what Richard learned when watching his own performance and the nuances he's learned in the past five and-a-half years.

Yes, he's continued to learn. And there's no reason why we can't take advantage of it. Jim Sisti notes that "never content with an effect being good, (Richard) is always combing through every nuance of a routine looking to wring every last drop of entertainment and mystery out of it until it's great." I'd go further; I'd say that he doesn't stop wringing even when it's great.

You have the [i]MM Vol 1[/i] DVD? Then you know the material and you know the methods. Want to make it better? Want to perform a Bank Night where you know the timing to every second, where you literally manipulate audience members into feeding you jokes and straight lines? Would you like to see how to turn it into an actual story -- where your audience feel themselves become major players in the story?

Would you like to know what Malini meant for magicians when he said "It's all in the eyes"?

I am very sorry to see such extensive dissection of the Perfected Center Tear and ThoughtScan. These are quite possibly the most valuable effects in mentalism and quite literally, the perfection is in the details. And the most valuable secrets of these two items are right here in this book. This means that what I've learned through extensive practice and study of the two booklets devoted to these effects ([i]the Perfected Center Tear and Other Assorted Routines[/i] and the [i]ThoughtScan[/i] instructions) is available to anyone with minimal study. There's a begrudging feeling that new readers are getting this too easily. (grumble grumble... See [i]Matthew [/i]20:11-12)

All the routines from "the Act" get this sort of in-depth treatment. Even the ones which shouldn't -- because there's more to "the Act" than we saw on the DVD! No, it's not fair that any of us should get this experience by proxy, but we do.

Did I know there was so [i]much [/i]rich history behind the Radar Deck (I knew some of it) or the Magazine Test? Did I even suspect that the Watch Routine had evolved even more since the DVD was filmed? How could I have known how Linking Finger Rings was structured to be an encore -- and how to ensure the audience begs for an encore?

Could I have known how to manipulate and "play" an audience so skillfully that they're almost behaving as if following a script? [i]Maybe [/i]-- after a coupld of decades of practice. Here I get years - YEARS - shaved off my work.

What would I do differently if I had put this book together? It's a ridiculous premise -- I don't have the knowledge or experience. I couldn't have put this together.

I would have explained what a "13 Invitational meeting" was, especially on page 16 when it's first mentioned. I'd have let the reader know who Raxon is and why that's important. Sure, some readers would know this - and some readers wouldn't. (For grins, there was a Raxon who was a Captain America villain. Another piece of useless trivia for your pleasure.)

And those are the only two criticisms. Maybe when I become a lot more experienced, I'll be able to find others - but I doubt it.

Y'know, I take something back. I said I don't have the knowledge and experience. Well, I don't have the experience.

But I now have the knowledge.

*jeep!
--Gran'pa Chet

Mormonism and Magic

2006-02-03T20:49:00.000-06:00

Let me just rattle here a bit and see if something sensible comes out of this.

Magicians and mentalists are just too darned cynical. We use deception to simulate marvelous implausibilities, and then assume that anything which isn’t in our immediate experience is similarly fake.

We get so caught up in selling our personas that we start believing in them, and think we’re controlling powers and abilities far beyond those of mortals.

And now from left field –

People have written me and asked what Mormons think about magic. They know that there are some fundamental Christians who think that it’s the devil’s work and that all we magicians are going to Hell. (Most of those same fundamentalists think Mormons are going to Hell too, so I don’t worry about ‘em.) They wonder if we have the same concerns. Other Christians wonder how we reconcile what we do with what we know.

That’s really several different questions.

“Do Mormons believe there is such a thing as real magic or demonic powers?” Yep. Probably not as you consider them. We believe that when Jesus said that, with faith, we could just tell a mountain to move and it would move – well, we believe him. And that pretty much sums up what we think is the similarity between “real magic” (as people think of it) and faith. As far as demon types, we know that 1/3 of Heavenly Father’s children rebelled against him. Those 1/3, led by Lucifer, will never know the joys of being born into mortality as the rest of us have, and will never have bodies. But they remember their lives (and ours) from before this mortal life, while we’ve had a veil pulled over our memories. (And that veil isn’t very thick sometimes.) As Brigham Young once pointed out, sure Satan could cause this water jug to jump up and dance about, but that wouldn’t serve him any purpose. Similarly, if we exercised faith, we could do such things – but what purpose would they serve?

We believe what Jesus said and says, and we believe that we don’t exercise that kind of faith for the most part, nor do we waste our energies with wanting to do silly little tricks that serve no purpose.

We also know that we prefer to be anxiously engaged in good pursuits, and that magic – for magic’s sake alone – is pretty frivolous. On the other hand, there’s nothing wrong with entertainment value provided to an audience – humans were meant to laugh if they were meant to do anything. And for those who perform magic as their jobs, it’s not frivolous: it’s putting food on the table for the family.

“Do we believe that witches and wizards should’ve been put to death?” That part of the Mosaic Code which says to suffer no witch to live, was mistranslated. Joseph Smith found that the actual command was to suffer no murderer to live. That’s an entirely different concept. Even people who decry capital punishment might recognize that it was an effective deterrent for a wandering bunch of people who lived in a desert for 40 years.

On the other hand, we tend to recognize that a lot of people who proclaimed themselves wizards were not pulling these stunts for entertainment. No, they were after power and riches. We can’t be surprised when such people met bad ends. People love to be entertained, but if they find you’ve been tricking them into being your lackeys….

So that brings us to today, when we feel that David Copperfield, Kreskin, and Richard Osterlind are marvelous entertainers; while folks who pretend to have power from God or gods are just power-hungry fools. And we feel pretty badly towards anyone who seeks power.

Because the greatest power has always been the power to serve. He who is the most powerful who walked among us, has been and is the servant of all.

and finally -- review of Mind Mysteries Too Vol 7

2006-01-11T17:46:00.000-06:00

Boy, did I put a LOT of typoes in my review of Volume 6, or what?! I usually do so much better when I write in Notepad, then paste it into a post. Right off the bat, I see that I managed to lose a line in the 2d paragraph. One sentence SHOULD have read something like "Unlike typical card magic, the choosing of the cards seems almost incidental."

Maybe we should just have a contest to see how many typographical errors there are in that post!

On to Volume 7 (at last!!) - and a Question & Answer routine which is also sold separately (but with text and props) under the name of "the Final Answer." I don't
know if it will be the final Q & A routine ever published, but it does manage to be *very* strong and address the inherent strength & weakness (they're the same thing) of Q & A routines, as noted by Bob Cassidy. I can't say *how* it addresses this weakness, but pay close attention, for it's subtle.

A Q & A routine consists of the mentalist answering questions from the audience, questions asking about future occurances in their private lives. MOST - not all - of the time, the mentalist will read their minds to determine their questions, even before he "cold reads" the individuals and then predicts the answer to their question. Upon that skeleton, some of the finest and some of the worst acts have been built.

In this version, Richard methodically proves - without stating so - that he couldn't possibly have seen their written questions. A bold method, there might seem to be a possible method as one views this -- but it's absolutely impossible, and is dismissed almost immediately. With even a passable presentation (though it would not be recommended to try any mentalism without rehearsing a more-than-passable presentation) your audience suspends their disbelief with wild abandon, for the presentation lends itself to excitement. (See previous comment about the inherent strength of the Q & A: "She's going to answer MY question!!")

One VERY important piece of chutzpah that proves the innocence of the mentalist: Richard frequently stops in the middle of his answering to ask "You didn't write down
(for instance) the colour or price?" or "You didn't write down the number, did you?" type questions.

An EXCELLENT teaching moment occurs when one of Richard's audience members writes a smart-alecky question. With more politeness than is required, Richard answers his
question without stating what the question is, gets the guy to admit the question was answered, then tells him he should be ashamed of himself for asking such a question.

In the Explanations discussion with Jim Sisti, Richard tells how he could have truly humiliated the guy. (DON'T you humiliate anyone either. You never know who has a
gun.) Sooner or later, you're gonna get a smart-aleck like this; now you'll know how to defang them.

"The Final Answer" (Q & A) is only one routine out of twelve on this disk, but we spent this much time on it because it runs deep.

"Test Conditions II" shows another use for the Breakthrough Card System. That's all I really need to say, and I may have tipped too much. But the DVD jacket tells us this is the BCS, so perhaps I haven't. In this case, you "find their card" -- even though THEY shuffle the deck, repeatedly. To show the "bullet-proof"ness of this bit, Richard calls upon a magician to be his guinea pig. Almost as quickly as the fellow hands back the pack, Osterlind pulls out the spectator's card. Boom.

He even gives away the pack of cards afterwards, disproving any stacking or marking.

"Tribute to Tarbell" has the most intriguing title in this series, and lives up to its promise. A subject thinks of their card and ANOTHER audience member puts
their finger on the card - even though member #2 only sees the backs of the fanned deck. Please, PLEASE study the presentation of this -- it more than doubles the impossibility.

"Psychological Impossibility" proves, to me at least, that STRONG magic and STRONG mentalism are very compatable - and may be indistinguishable from each other at times. Jenelle (sp?) just THINKS of a card. The card is definitely in one packet (she verifies this). Frank picks a card from a different packet, which is put in
Richard's pocket. (Scotty has earlier verified that Richard's pocket is empty.) Jenelle's card is no longer in the packet which has never left her (or anyone's)
sight....but it's the card in Richard's pocket. This isn't presented as a card trick nor as a mentalism stunt. It's just done, period. Following "the Final Answer" (as did the previous two experiments) this leaves the aftertaste of having had one's sense of reality unbalanced. See if you can spot a classic (from Tarbell?) subtlety. Osterlind loves the classics, and insists that they are undermined.

And if "P.I." was magic-turned-psychological, what will we make of "Matchbook Prediction"?? Frank picks a card. Osterlind can't quite read his mind, and stops to (ugh!) smoke a pipe and think.

[A side note. You probably didn't know it, but it is a state law in Kentucky that every citizen is required to smoke. At least it seems that way every time I drive to
Louisville.]

Our travelling mentalist tosses his matchbook to the side. Frank feels compelled to pick up the matchbook (Janelle is whispering "no..") -- and the matchbook IS his chosen card.

Frank drops the matchbook on the table. Frank picks another card. The matchbook, which has been laying right there, is now the NEW card. (Janelle *shouts* "NO!")
The audience is wondering if Osterlind has hypnotised them.

Set Nine begins -- ah, Set Nine, where we mix the new with the well-travelled roads, and neither seem to suffer. "ESP Stack" reveals yet *another* hidden gem
(hidden, because it was in print) that looks (Here we go again!) just like the ESP tests that all those 1970s movies and TV shows used. Very Kreskinish, this could be
done even if you and the tester are in separate rooms. And, nope, no one is going to discover any stack. (Don't tell your audience the title of this, OK?)

ODDS, the "Osterlind Design Duplication System" is demonstrated with (of all things) a duplication of a picture that one's audience member draws. No peeks - nothing which even looks like a peek. Like the ESP Stack, it resembles the test conditions which big-time scientists have set to prove or disprove psychic sight. This does not look like a trick, and if you perform it - please give it all the care and attention it deserves.

ODDS *is* a system, as its name indicates, and there are many uses to which this can be put. You'll find a *really* intriguing - and mystical-looking! - use of it
by Greg Arce on Richard's site. No, I'm not going to tell you the URL. For something this good, you ought to do a little work.

We come to an effect which could easily be dismissed as a hoary chestnut. The basic principle is in all those horrendously amateur "Blaine Exposed" e-books that litter
the landscape. Yet, as if to prove to us that exposure cannot kill a classic, Osterlind twists "Ashes on the Hand" enough to make it almost a new effect. Now, it's definitely a psychic marvel and impromptu -- NO forcing!

For fun, you can (again) be in separate rooms. There are several sneaks at work here. If you thought you knew the "Ashes" routine, you might be surprised at how much life is in this. Try not to laugh when he keeps saying "I don't know if this is gonna work or not," as if he isn't in complete control of the situation.

I am almost embarassed to admit that I really thought I knew how to do the Paddle Move. But "Pen Paddle Move" shows me a way to do it in *slow motion* directly under
someone's nose. And to continue in his vein of using everyday objects, Richard demonstrates this with those flat pens that your client may well be giving out at a
trade show you're working. (Which is the case, and the patter, used here.) Since, using these pens, one can give them out as samples (or advertising!) it's funny to
watch people rubbing them, tapping them, clicking them - all in an attempt to make them change as they've just seen them do!

There's not much which can be discussed here (without tipping the method); it either works well, or not at all. It works very well indeed.

"Dad's Favorite" is a quiet, unassuming Four Aces routine which doesn't pretend to be mentalism. What it provides is opportunity to practice audience management and
humour. It provides a nice break, and is a useful in-betweener so that everyone can catch their breath. The real star of this routine is the back story. It doesn't go for the "tug your heart" as Copperfield's Four Aces routine did; this gives you a pleasant, homey feeling. I think you'll like it.

And yet ANOTHER of those great pieces from a book shows up! You're probably familiar with the "Haunted Key" gimmick - but what if you did it without moving at all,
not one muscle? What if you convinced yourself that you really were using the power of your mind to move something? Aw, now I've said too much ---! Using this technique, I've had little problem in moving the key in someone ELSE's hand. Learn this principle, and you learn a LOT more magic than just this one effect.

Richard then demonstrates - and later shows how to build - one of his popular effects called "Solid Ghost." Don't expect this to be Glorpy. The patter backstory builds a
"creation of reality" which develops into something solid and round, very much like a baseball, which appears under a handkerchief. Thump it with something; it thumps.
It's solid. Your spectator feels it. It grows and, just when you think you can get ahold of it, it's not there. And we're told "it was never there" at all.

A good portion of this disk isn't "pure" mentalism at all, but you'd be cheating yourself if you dismissed this portion. The title of the series is "Mind Mysteries" and that mystery definitely happens in the audience's mind.

Pay VERY close attention to what Osterlind teaches during the explanation for "Pen Paddle Move." He's very passionate about magic & mentalism, and he insists that
these things can and should be done as if they're the highest of art. His passion is on display when he mourns a magician he saw who made something beautiful into "just
a cheap trick." During this explanation, he also teaches how to utterly disarm someone who says they know how something is done.

Once again, I'm grateful that Jim Sisti is there to make this an almost interactive conversation during the explanations. During the explanation for "Dad's Favorite," he actually seems to be second-guessing what I would do if I was there.

It's almost incongruous that "the Final Answer" starts this disk. It's so powerful that it overwhelms the fun little routines which finish up the home stretch. (Though I'd argue that Haunted Key is just as powerful.) A wise person would remember that these DVDs are for teaching, and would create an act from these effects. That's what routining is all about: making one effect flow smoothly to another, and for it all to tie together into one great whole.

Which of course, leads us back to the classics and Tarbell's excellent instructions for routining an act. I am beginning to think that Richard is on a mission to lead us to Tarbell and beyond.

*jeep!
--Gran'pa Chet

Mind Mysteries Too Vol 6 -- this is too long

2006-01-11T17:45:00.000-06:00

"Something different" is what Mr Osterlind says he'll start the first set with, which is three signed cards to impossible locations. (Miracle Flying Cards being its title.) What makes this really effective, is that it becomes more and more impossible as each location is revealed. Here is a principle that we'd do well to absorb - to go from the believeable to the unlikely to the impossible. Thus will the impossible become, at least, believeable in context even while the mind is reeling. (The 4th Superman movie - the first with Chris Reeve - used this principle to get to an outrageous climax.) Unlike typical card magic, the choosing of the cards Once again, Osterlind blurs the line between mentalism and magic; perhaps he'd prefer the term "mysterian"? Though I don't think he's offended when some say he doesn't do "pure mentalism," whatever he's doing seems pure to his audiences -- and I get the same reactions when I perform his material.

Spirit Writing on Card invokes a thought-of shape onto a card - as a matter of fact, the shape is burned into the card. At first, one thinks he might actually be burning that shape with his lighter, but the reveal shows *that* wasn't the case. As a matter of fact, it's only when some of the burn marks are wiped away that the shape becomes clear. Nicely done, easy to do, but pay attention to the presentation - it makes the difference between real mystery and "ho-hum." (You're getting tired of hearing me stress presentation, aren't you?)

As a throwaway, as this is beginning, he abruptly demonstrates a mastery over fire as he's beginning this routine. He *just does it* as if it's something he doesn't even think about. This is how a real magician/mentalist/mysterian (? I need a new word.) would treat the physical world, and it sharply makes him an "other" in the audience's mind, even while they "know" that he's just a normal mortal. Well, they *think* they know this; there have been too many times when even *my* audiences have been unsure.

(From time to time, I abruptly move from "Richard does this" to "What happens when I perform this." My reasoning is that these are *instructional* videos and we are interested in how well they'll teach us to perform these effects.)

Our next effect could be considered a hypnotic effect as well as a PK thing. It's Multiple Key Bending, and it happense in the hands of an audience member who seems to be hypnotised into feeling the keys actually breathing in her hands, and that she's unable to unclasp her fingers. I'm no hypnotist, and I've convinced people that the same thing is happening. Of course, when she opens her hands, several keys are bent and she actually felt them bending at the time. And - oh boy! - he's able to show, during the explanation, how a potential disaster can actually increase the intensity of this effect!

We saw Richard perform the classic Clip Line on the Easy to Master Mental Miracles DVDs, and we go into the next clip wondering if the classic routine has been improved beyond its need. I don't think so. There are now opportunities for the audience to choose between at least two different clippings, and then to choose either side of the chosen clipping. The empowerment of the audience seems to increase the mystery here, and makes the prediction seem even more miraculous. Knowing the original, it still looks incredibly impossible. Richard points out that one should choose this or the original, based on the audience and the situation of the performance. Either will produce audible gasps; this version works with the more attentive and bright audience.

If you didn't buy *Making Real Magic* the book, you didn't read Osterlind's excellent introduction to the explanation of Amazing Memory Demonstration, in which he states that you perform this effect by *really doing it*. The audience shouts out 20 different items, with details. (Not just a car, for instance, but a car of particular make and colour.) He (and you, if you choose to learn this) not only plays back the list, but can remember any individual item (if they ask for #17, you'll tell them #17) and finishes by relating the entire list *backwards* - AND states whether each item has already been called and checked off.

To further stun us during the explanation, he playfully relates that this comes from Corinda and we should have been studying the basics.

And now I mourn, for Richard demonstrates and teaches StenoESP. Well, one version of it, at least. This is SUCH a powerful routine, and has been SO successful when I've performed it, that I truly mourn that it's out in the open now. He published it in one of his books, which is always a perfect way to hide a good routine from magicians and mentalists. It's simple to see and comprehend. The mentalist predicts and/or mindreads thoughts of one, two, three, and/or the entire audience. Though this can be also done with a steno pad, Richard demonstrates the version using spiral-bound index cards. I have performed this with as few as one and as many as 30+ people, and it has never once failed to astound. And I can't think of how often I've been approached afterwards and asked if I were truly psychic. (Curse me for my honesty! I could have answered "How much is it worth to you?")

What's the difference between a card magician throwing away cards and still having those cards, and a mentalist doing the same thing? I don't know. Maybe you'll say a mentalist doesn't even do such a thing. But I don't think Osterlind's audience makes such a distinction (and I'll have to try this) when he performs Out of Hand and describes a terrible predicament he once "had." It's a funny story, and shows the dilemma an actual psychic would have with real life. And he starts out realizing that, during a poker game, he's dealt himself five aces. He gets rid of one. He still has the same five aces. He gets rid of another. He still has the same five aces. This goes on and on and on, and his frustration level grows. Somehow, he ends up with a Royal Flush in spades. This is a nice turn on the Magician in Trouble and a different "throw one away, still have all the cards" routine. This is more of good old regular magic than mentalism, but he still gets away with it. I'll probably try this at some point, because it looks like so much fun!

Richard then chooses to have a little fun with a magician in the audience. Industrial Strength Link is a variation on the spring-on-ring routine, this time using a coat hanger and not being the old spring-on-ring routine. In short, the audience gets much amusement from the magician who knows spring-on-ring and then finds himself befuddled. It could easily become a mentalism routine by claiming to cloud the mind of the helper. You might not have opportunity to pull it on a fellow magician, but oh BOY is it funny when you can!

Now *here's* something which looks like you're controlling your audience member. A couple of what may have once been "betchas" are combined into Coin Snatch, in which you literally grab a coin from their palm before they can close their fingers. (You start out underneath their hand.) And then you grab a coin off a table before they can, even though they're just a couple of inches away, and you're more than several feet away. Don't use these as effects on their own; they make great change-of-pace effects between other routines.

Card Warp gets turned on its ear with Original Inside Out. This deserves a backstory developed for it, because it's a very visual impossibility. You fold a card into quarters. It visibly turns inside out. To stop it from doing that, you put a big ol' paper clip on it. It still turns visibly inside out, without disturbing the clip. The card isn't gimmicked, really; it's even given away at the end. Again, we've stepped solidly into the realm of magic again -- unless the mentalist is clouding our minds again.

Hm...we really are crossing that line so often, that it's a wonder we have any idea where we are at this point. And the point is that your audience will be - not confused - but mystified.

During the explanations, that black curtain is back, triggering my claustrophobia again. Fortunately, Jim Sisti is more on-camera again, and that chemistry between the two professionals is on-camera also. Watching it now, I can see why Richard wanted to stand with no table earlier. He really does use his hands so much in talking that there is a real possibility he'll smash his hands on the table. (I'm also guilty of using my hands; my mother always threatened to tie my hands so I'd be unable to talk.) And he really is more animated when Jim's on stage with him and, once again, Jim asks the questions that we would if we were there. The straight man rarely gets the sort of credit he deserves (just ask Bud Abbott some eon) and I think we owe Jim a round of applause for representing us, the viewers, so well.

Volume Seven to follow, with an overview and possible essay afterwards.

Exhausted,
*jeep!
---Chet

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?

2005-12-19T20:56:00.000-06:00

Back-stabbing and sniping is an accepted part of just about any business, and they're certainly well practiced in show business. And the more a person is in the public eye -- or even if they're famous within our little subcultrue -- the more that person is a target.

Case in point: A long and well-behaved thread which reviewed, overviewed, questioned, INspected, DIssected, INfected, and NEglected Richard Osterlind's Mind Mysteries Too. For the non-wizards in the house, that's a set of teaching DVDs of mentalism and magic. They cover new ideas, presentation of old ideas, and extrapolation of ideas to their fullest. But I digress..

This thread was, as they say, hijacked by some folks with some axe to grind. One person posted a review which, while not really very negative, managed to slam anyone who had anything good to say about these DVDs. Along the way, he backhanded a few effects on the disks with no more than a casual "they weren't any good" type of dismissal. (His reasons? Didn't really give any, just said they weren't good.)

Quite naturally, the people who liked the DVDs felt they'd been grossly insulted. The offensive poster had claimed that anyone who liked these DVDs were putting Osterlind on a pedestal. His precise wording was that we were treating Osterlind as if he were a god.

When called on this insult, he continually denied he was rude. He then went on to consistently insult any and every person who dared suggest he was wrong. Unable to apologize, he turned more and more ugly, until he'd managed to convince people that he was downright evil and, perhaps, dangerous.

He, and a few others, made the thread so ugly that the management had to delete it. All of it.

Today, I heard he was (I quote) "insanely angry" at me for being one of the people to tell him that, no, he wasn't an emperor. Not long after, I received a worm (semi-intelligent virus) over my internet connection. Luckily, my virus protection software caught it, trapped it, and - with the help of a good network engineer - traced it back to the locale of the aforementioned evil person.

Perhaps it wasn't him. Perhaps it was one of his fans (he's had at least one of his gimmicks checked out by David Blaine) who were as uptight as he. Either way, it points out two things:

Magicians aren't exactly united.

And it's way too easy to hijack someone else's computer, not to mention a thread in a discussion forum.

*jeep!

Mysterious Mindings to Mind Mysteries Too

2005-12-18T22:33:00.000-06:00

Some nasty-tempered people over at the Magic Cafe managed to hijack a review thread and got it deleted. This leaves us without a review of the Mind Mysteries Too DVDs. Let's attempt to fill that vacuum and see if the roaches come out again. I'll cut and paste it from here to there; this site is mainly for me to work out drafts and sort of log significant events anyway.

When I saw the first series of Mind Mysteries DVDs (four in all) I picked up the first volume, completely enjoyed it, but had no desire to pick up the other disks. The descriptions sounded like magic - and I wanted more of the mentalism that I saw on Disk #1. How little I knew---

This year, my wife presented me with the new series of Mind Mysteries Too (numbering continued from the first set, so these are #5, 6, & 7) and the descriptions showed me that, once again, there was magic mixed with mentalism. But this time, I was not afraid. We'll talk about that in a minute.

First, let's talk about Volume 5, which begins with what at first resembles the hoary old Mental Epic. But wait! It's just a normal chalkboard, and Osterlind just clips some index cards over his predictions. Normal, everything looks normal. And it's so simple and the L & L usual gang of suspects, who you'd think have seen everything, fall apart. And I, who know the "secret," also fall apart. It looks so normal.

Cutlery bends take the stage at this point, and (unlike MM 3) these really *do* fool me. (Thanks to a slight sleight that Richard demonstrates later.) Very much in plain sight, one spoon bends over obediantly. He puts this spoon quite literally right under Janelle's (sp?) nose and she sees, as I do, the impossible. And then several forks bend at once, looking for all the world like stop-motion photography of a plant wilting. And, yeah, his explanation makes it look easy. (This is a falsehood. We'll talk about *that* in a minute too.)

The following routine comes from a booklet that Jim & Richard (which sounds like a 1964 singing duo) published awhile ago; it's ancestry is traced to *the Jinx*. I am VERY disappointed that Richard demonstrates "the Very Modern Mindreader" on this disk, because I wanted it kept to myself. Failing that, I'd hoped it would stay with only those performers who could and would read books. Spectators seal their own factoids in little envelopes that are used only by mentalists and banks. THEY seal them; my audiences always insisted that I hadn't even touched 'em when I performed this. And then I would, as Richard does on this video, tell them what's on the card -- and many things which they'd never written. As I said, this began as "the Modern Mindreader" in *the Jinx* -- but now all the weaknesses and possible flubs of the original have been turned into strengths. Even a fumble-fingered klutz such as I have been able to perform this -very- strongly. It's a routine which demonstrates one of Osterlind's greater strengths: the ability to look at an idea, ruthlessly tear it down to its most primal form, then rebuild it with a stronger structure. (Mike Close is also known for this ability. We'll have to make an essay out of this idea some time.)

A strong lesson taught during the explanation is that bold and natural, is safer than safe.

Digital Feedback follows, and it doesn't really fit my style but I'll eventually try it anyway. A calculator is used by various spectators to add various "think of" numbers. Twice, by two different groups of people. And the mentalist has predicted what numbers each group would have. And then he shows he predicted what the total of the two numbers would be. This takes a tremendous amount of chutzpah and showmanship; otherwise the audience would realize that of COURSE he'd know the total if he knew the numbers. But they don't, they just don't, because the mentalist should have them in his/her power at this point.

Aside: Richard's explanation suggests an expensive piece of equipment. I had no problem with a cheap version. I'm such a cheapskate!

Opening the second set, Osterlind walks out with a folded card or piece of paper held in plain sight, never leaving our sight at all. Someone gives him a number, and Richard hands him the card - still folded. Unfolding it, the innocent audience member finds the number that they said. Yes, this is as simple as it sounds. Be surprised at how strongly people react to this. It's great for strolling. This routine was included in TWO books which the aforementioned singing due published. Really, if no one picked up on it by this time, you'd think Richard could have held it back for a few more years.

The Stainless Steel Blindfold is mainly about the prop, which magicians will dismiss and audiences will puzzle over. It's a blindfold routine (What else?) with a high-tech flavor. What you'll see here is the mentalist visualizing a photo that is BEHIND him while he's blindfolded. If you watch this with your spouse, you're liable to hear all sorts of guesses such as "the blindfold acts like a mirror -- but it's too tight around his face. And the angle is all wrong for a reflection to show. That's not possible."

For a couple of bucks, you can make put together the Penomenally routine, where a pen moves without you going near it - and no one can find any threads and it does more than just fall over. Or you can spend another twenty bucks and get the prop from Jim Sisti. What you'll see here is the presentation which takes this beyond just a neat trick, and makes it a real gasper.

And that leads to the final routine on Disk 5: Stopping a Watch. But the watches don't just stop. They change time, sometimes when the mentalist isn't really near the watch. (It's not what you do, and it's not what they think you do, it's what they REMEMBER you did!) At one point, you'll see a watch start spinning like crazy. Oh yeah, you can scare your grandkids with this one.

The explanations on these disks occasionally border on the boring this time. I'm convinced we need the interplay between Jim Sisti and Richard Osterlind; the colorful table and backdrop are needed too. These explanations are effective, but that dark backdrop and empty set just has some sort of lost-in-a-cave claustrophobic feel to it. Brrrr! It gets so much better when Jim joins Richard on camera!

That's a lot said about only one disk. I think I'll take a break, take some insulin, and wait 'til Monday or Tuesday night to write about Disk Six.

....which is actually better than Disk Five and includes my favorite routine.

Dan Turcotte: Aloha

2005-09-20T12:46:00.000-05:00

'Til we meet again.

Dan Turcotte ended his battle with cancer two days ago on Sunday morning, September 18.

I wish there was another section this post could go, one where I could be sure everyone in magic saw it. Andrea is going to be going through some very rough times, especially after the initial shock wears off. Widow's grief really tends to hit three to four weeks after the funeral, when all the friends had relatives have scattered back to their own lives and the loneliness sets in. I ask that those who know her, do not forget her. And if you don't know her, you might get to know her; she's a wonderful woman.

In this life, Dan loved entertaining more than anything other than his wife and his daughter. When he lost the use of his left side last December, when they found the tumors in his brain, he still worked to get his DVDs distributed -- not solely to make a living for his wife and daughter, but because he wanted - even if only digitally - to continue entertaining people.

He loved teaching and he loved working with children. I'm sure he still does. Most of us find working with children just a little bit frightening, because they are the toughest of audiences. But when one wins them over, they're the most appreciative. Dan always won them over.

The visitation is at 3 pm today; the memorial service is at 4 pm, and the memorial service is to be a celebration the way Dan wanted. His life was magical and he loved bringing magic into the lives of his audiences, and he absolutely delighted in doing so right under their noses. Though he succeeded on stage, he remained fondest of close-up work and encouraged that in me. He ended up teaching me most of what I know when it comes to audience direction, and he taught me to find the best workers and to seek wisdome from them.

I have absolutely no doubt that Dan is learning more about life and hope now, and that he carries with him the joy and fun of magic. I have no doubt that he will continue to entertain grown-ups and children - especially children - through the eternities. And I have no doubt that he prepares for his loved ones, and hopes they continue to remember him well.

And that he's seeking out the best teachers of the past, because Dan was - in this life - ever-learning. I see no reason to doubt that he continues to learn and to grow. And maybe - just maybe - he's a little less stubborn.

For instance, I think he'd urge anyone who currently smokes to stop now, and give their families a few more years of their lives. And if one hasn't started, to never start. We might have had Dan quite a few more years.

One of my greatest regrets is that I'm in Ohio and can't make it to the service in time. I'd love to tell Andrea, face to face, how much Dan means to me.

This Saturday at 2 pm, I'll be doing a show at Be Amazing Magic's theatre, and that show will be dedicated to Dan -- for all that he taught me, encouraged me, and befriended me.

Our loss is great. Andrea's is greater. But Dan has an inconquerable spirit, and he won't be leaving her completely alone.

*jeep!
--Chet, who misses his friend

I love my audience

2005-06-29T21:24:00.000-05:00

The great Thurston was said to wait behind the curtains, chanting "I love my audience" over and over. I wonder how many magicians and mentalists today really love their audiences. If I'm to believe a good portion of posts from the magic community, too many people are into magic now - just to feel superior to their audiences.

There's a wonderful and terrifying debate going on at the Magic Cafe which touches on this subject. The debate, led by master mentalist Richard Osterlind on the "respect your audience" side, is ostensibly about pre-show work. In actuality, it appears to be about how one treats one's audience.

The argument is nothing new, really - it's just moved to mentalism now. The same arguments which were made against magic on TV were proven invalid by some incredibly hard work by Mark Wilson. He proved, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that one could make magic completely believable on television. It took extra work, and it meant that one had to be really, really open with one's audience. In essense, Mr Wilson said "We know there are ways to use the camera to trick you - but we promise to not do that, and we'll do everything we can to keep your trust."

I happen to think that mentalism can do exactly the same.

A chap by the name of Criss Angel will be attempting a regular series of mentalist effects in a few weeks (on A&E). He has some very, very good advisors for his show (such as the incredible Banachek); I can only hope his producers don't fall back on the camera tricks which make recent magic specials look phoney.