Post by dwm on Dec 14, 2019 17:47:28 GMT -5
So, as far as mentalism with playing cards go, there's two types of mentalists. One group who thinks nothings of incorporating playing cards in a set, some even going so far as to have a set mostly or totally composed of mentalism with playing cards. Then another group who insist that playing cards have no place in mentalism. It's ironic to me that the latter group also tend to think nothing of incorporating ESP/Zenner cards into there performance.
It's ironic to me because Zenner cards traditionally are composed of 5 designs repeated 5 times. So no matter what design someone thinks of, there's a 1 out of 5 chance to guess it correctly. Compare that to a pack of playing cards...With playing cards there is a 1 out of 52 (53 if you leave a Joker in) chance of merely guessing it. What's going on here?
From what I gather this argument over this small thing began when it was believed that when an audience sees a mentalist bring out playing cards, they think of "slieght of hand" or "card tricks". Basically they think of "trickery" as apposed to "mindreading".
It's my personal opinion that this argument is flawed as laymen tend to think of card games and gambling when they see a standard pack of playing cards. However, I also believe that the cards a mentalist uses should at least appear to be a pack of cards familiar to the audience. I think there's a strong argument to be made for say, using custom or foreign looking cards in a mentalism performance. I do believe that using such cards will lead the audience to believe ultimately that unusual looking pack of cards may be gimmicked in some way.
I'd be re-missed also if I didn't point out that a ton of the greats used them in there show. Joseph Dunninger, Theodore Annemann, Charles Jordon, Milborune Chistopher, Paul Rosini, Eddie Joseph, Eddie Fields, George Martz, Max Maven, Richard Osterlind, Derren Brown, our own Ben Blau on here and countless others.
It still blows my mind that to this day this argument still exists among mentalists. What do you guys think of this? It's okay if you don't agree with my point of view, we can talk about it, but I would like to do so civilly. In any case thank you for your time and I hope you enjoyed hearing my point of view on this subject!
It's ironic to me because Zenner cards traditionally are composed of 5 designs repeated 5 times. So no matter what design someone thinks of, there's a 1 out of 5 chance to guess it correctly. Compare that to a pack of playing cards...With playing cards there is a 1 out of 52 (53 if you leave a Joker in) chance of merely guessing it. What's going on here?
From what I gather this argument over this small thing began when it was believed that when an audience sees a mentalist bring out playing cards, they think of "slieght of hand" or "card tricks". Basically they think of "trickery" as apposed to "mindreading".
It's my personal opinion that this argument is flawed as laymen tend to think of card games and gambling when they see a standard pack of playing cards. However, I also believe that the cards a mentalist uses should at least appear to be a pack of cards familiar to the audience. I think there's a strong argument to be made for say, using custom or foreign looking cards in a mentalism performance. I do believe that using such cards will lead the audience to believe ultimately that unusual looking pack of cards may be gimmicked in some way.
I'd be re-missed also if I didn't point out that a ton of the greats used them in there show. Joseph Dunninger, Theodore Annemann, Charles Jordon, Milborune Chistopher, Paul Rosini, Eddie Joseph, Eddie Fields, George Martz, Max Maven, Richard Osterlind, Derren Brown, our own Ben Blau on here and countless others.
It still blows my mind that to this day this argument still exists among mentalists. What do you guys think of this? It's okay if you don't agree with my point of view, we can talk about it, but I would like to do so civilly. In any case thank you for your time and I hope you enjoyed hearing my point of view on this subject!
