#33096 - 04/21/07 06:02 PM
Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I knew nothing about this man other than the Berglas effect.
This interview is great! What an interesting man he is. Thank you Richard and Genii for opening my eyes to his wonderful world of magic.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33097 - 04/29/07 08:31 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I'm going to go against the grain and say that the entire time I was reading the article (I'm going to separate the article from the man, as the article itself was a monumental task) I couldn't help but think how much Berglas sounds like John Scarne.
The man has a lot of bluster, and doesn't offer up very many of his more unblievable stories that can, or have been confirmed by others. Things like the healing on the ship to South Africa come to mind as so over the top as to be rather a stretch.
Berglas's slag on Tony Corinda seems highly out of place and to me indicates a guy who just can't seem to accept that he actually had contemporaries throughout his career. Berglas seems unable to accept that it was Tony Corinda who wrote the bible of mentalisim, so Berglas has to imply that a huge percentage of the material within the book was stolen from him by Corinda, and that it is HE...Berglas, who should receive accolades for 13 Steps.
Berglas seems a man who has spent his career believing his own press kit.
His explanations regarding how his term as President of the Magic Circle, and how his board somehow opperated independantly of him resulting in many unpopular decisions was interesting. How the President of a Board could not be aware or involved in something like purchasing a new clubhouse shows eiether gross neglect of his job, or a man not bothering to pay attention to what his Board is doing, but signing off on things anyway.
In the end I found that not only did Berglas sound like Scarne, but many of his stories seemed obviously only partly true. His motivation apparently to clean up the overall image of some of his less shining moments. The Magic Circle comments beg to hear the other side of the story, the side from the Board of Directors themselves regarding how THEY saw Berglas as President and what his shortcomings were.
In any article if there is obvious doubt on one portion of a persons ability to recall the facts, there is instantly doubt on all the rest of the facts presented to the reader as well.
In a career retrospective like this, Berglas shouldn't have strayed into territory like he did with Corinda and the Magic Circle Board, the fact that he did only makes one want to see the other side of the story, and ALL the facts for many of the stories Berglas related in the article.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33099 - 04/29/07 11:15 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I thought it was a great interview with an amazing and interesting man.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33100 - 04/29/07 11:47 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I wasn't aware that I was suposed to share the authors opinion on their subject or be sent off packing to the Linking Ring!
Richard, I don't know where the Linking Ring comment came from, but for the record, I have long opted out of receiving the Linking Ring in my IBM membership for very close to the reasons mentioned in your post.
I subscribe to Genii by CHOICE, and do so because I think it's an outstanding magazine, most every month the very best of the lot......an important point if you're going to suggest I head off to read other magazines if I don't happen to agree with any particular article in Genii, or get impressions as a result of reading an article in Genii that differ from those of the author's impressions of their subject.
I'll just say that claims of healing the lame on a ship to South Africa cry out for wittnesses, regardless of WHO is making the claims.
I also made it quite clear in my post that the article itself deserved accolades for the huge undertaking it obviously was.
Just because the drift I get from Berglas's OWN comments differ from your own doesn't mean my opinion of the man as a result of reading the Genii article is any less valid than anybody elses.
That the man himself, in his own quotes sounds to me like John Scarne is an observation, and as unlikely as it is that I was the only reader of the article to feel that way, I supose that it is possible I stand alone with my opinion.
As for the attack on Corinda, sorry, I need more than just somebody telling me it's true to support the attack in the first place.
If it IS true Corinda used material without permission, I want to hear Corinda's side of the story as well. If you're going to lay a charge, you'd best be prepared to be asked for the evidence.
I don't doubt you researched the story deeply, but the findings aren't in the article, and I find their omission causes me to take Berglas's claims with at the very least, a grain of salt.
Even if one stands alone with their opinion, it remains a valid opinion nonetheless.
Not wishing to turn this into a back and forth exchange, I shall say no more on the subject other than, if anybody has an opinion to share about the article I'd like to hear it......however if anybody feels compelled to register an opinion on MY opinion ONLY, they clearly miss the point.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33101 - 04/29/07 01:08 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Bob Farmer
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 234
Loc: Short card above selection.
|
I was doing graduate work in London in 1975 and 1976. During that time, I saw David Berglas perform on several occasions. He was the only magician of the many magicians that I saw who consistently fooled everyone, magicians and laymen, alike.
He always had great effects, original presentations and damn effective methods (at least, I couldn't figure them out, so they were effective for me).
The only relevant comparison with Scarne is that Berglas, like Scarne, knows how to promote himself.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33102 - 04/30/07 07:14 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I think that all the comments that have been made in this thread about David Berglas are more or less correct. I have known David Berglas for at least 30 years. I have visited his home at least four or five times and have always received wonderful hospitality from him. Sadly for about ten years we ceased to speak or have anything to do with each other. Some time in 2001 I asked David if I could record some material on tape with him for a second Magicassette recording with him. The deal on the first recording was that I made it. I edited it and I put it out without having first to seek David's approval. In any case David liked the recording and especially the part of it that related to his live performance with me as a spectator on Any Card at Any Number. And there is quite a story relating to that as well!
When I returned to make tape number two there were no conditions laid down with regard to the need to seek David's permission for the release of the final MagicCDAudio. I have never ever allowed any of the people I have interviewed to impose conditions that could halt the final release of any recording. After I had interviewed Edwin of Supreme Magic he didn't like the material that he had released on the recording and did his best to stop me putting the tape out but despite his solicitor's letter I eventually put it out. I thought that the story of the UK's biggest and most successful magic dealer was fascinating but it was the least popular recording that I have ever made.
I recorded David and quizzed him a little on Any Card at Any Number as that is where the greatest interest lies for most magicians anxious to be able to duplicate this effect. I wonder how many magicians bought David's book and turned straight to the pages dealing with that effect and how many of the them put the book down feeling that on that effect they had learnt little. David was very free with information that he revealed and I was thrilled with the recording and sent him a copy on CD. He rang and told me that it was good but that he would like me to return to "add some more material to the recording". I didn't want to do that and suspected that what was interesting to listeners would be removed and more of the puffy type of stuff that David likes to perpetuate would be added .. in effect I believed that David would be attempting to use his great power of psychological manipulation on me and that I would end up with a recording that would have been essentially an advert for the major book that was forthcoming. In fact before we started work David had the kindness to allow me to be the only outsider to page through the proofs of the big book.
I recently wrote to David and sent him a cheque in payment for the recording and told him that I had been sitting on the recording for far too long and that it would be released very soon.
I was shocked at the reply I got which told me that I would be infringing his intellectual property and how dare I put it out without his approval AS HAD BEEN AGREED AS A CONDITION PRIOR TO MAKING THE RECORDING!!! There was no such condition agreed and for sure if David had made that stipulation in advance of the recording I just wouldn't have bothered at all to visit and record his words.
The tape obviously reveals more than David wished to be revealed about Any Card at Any Number. In fact I was planning to say in my advertising already written that with the information on this recording combined with the information in the book any competent magician would be equipped with sufficient knowledge to perform an excellent performance of Any Card at Any Number.
The interview started (at David's request) with me reading aloud the citation on his certificate of the Special Fellowship that he received from the Academy of Magical Arts. David glowed with pleasure as I read through the words of praise. He glowered with displeasure when he heard from me that I had also received much earlier A Special Fellowship from the Academy of Magical Arts. He asked me what contribution I thought I had made to magic to contribute to such recognition.
Anyway I have received clear instructions from David that the tape is not to be released and unless some highly qualified magical lawyer has some good advice to offer me it will remain stored away and unheard for ever. I would rather spend my time creating magic material than entering into a tedious legal battle. Now what has this got to do with the article on Berglas in my favourite magazine. Well, the magazine arrived on the same day as David's nasty letter and I just couldn't bring myself to read all about the good and wonderful things that David has done in life - and he has done many good and wonderful things in his life - when he had just done something pretty horrible to me.
I should add that I think that David is a brilliant performer, highly creative and imaginative and deserves every success that he has ever received. I saw him perform at the Labia Theatre, Cape Town when he was about 26 and I was just a teenager and his hypnosis show was the best that I have ever seen. He invited a spectator on stage right at the beginning of the show and "put him under a trance" and instructed him to stand to one side of the stage on one leg only. The poor man stood in that position for the entire show and to this day I do not have a clue as to how it was done. Unless of course he was a one-legged stooge used to standing on one leg. When David claims that he doesn't use stooges I can only add that once he asked me if my brother-in-law could give him a hand with a show and he did. Tony Camp, my brother-in-law, told me a few days later that he hadn't been invited to help set up the show but simply to be a stooge with a known credit card number for use when David did his brilliant sightless vision act. So I know for sure that David has used a stooge in his life and Tony Camp would be happy to verify that. Probably that was the only time that David used a stooge .. that just has to be the case, doesn't it.
Everyone in magic I would think wants to know more about Any Card at Any Number and unless I publish and be damned then no-one other than me and David will ever know. Does this sound rather bitter? Yes it does ... and that is because I am bitter about the attempted suppression of my recording.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33103 - 04/30/07 07:55 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Ian Kendall
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 307
Loc: Edinburgh
|
Wasn't this all dredged up last year?
Ian
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33104 - 04/30/07 09:33 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Jim Creighton
Member
Registered: 01/25/08
Posts: 4
Loc: Los Angeles
|
Once again, congratulations on a great issue and a fascinating interview. How I would love to have seen Berglas perform!
However, I don't see how any unbiased reader could help but feel that the interview made Berglas seem just a bit self-serving. I suppose that someone as accomplished as he is can be excused for tooting his own horn, but like "silverking," I would like to have seen those he criticized given some opportunity to make a response. That's kind of basic, isn't it?
And what's with the shot at the poor ol' Linking Ring? The comment was true enough, but it seemed a little gratuitous.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33105 - 04/30/07 09:41 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
No Ian. I haven't looked back but I believe that what I had to say in my diatribe today was not a rehash of what was said last year. There was little or no reference to my new recording I am sure and it was more to do with David accepting a deal to make his own cassette revealing all on the ACAAN effect and then backing out because he thought that I would me making more money than him.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33106 - 04/30/07 11:41 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The second-most amazing fact in this thread is that there is a venue in Cape Town named the Labia Theatre.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33107 - 04/30/07 12:07 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Great interview. It is a welcome addition to the massive book.
The book itself is a treasure trove in terms of delivering off beat ideas and methods, and that in itself is quite wonderful. Mr Berglas may not be beyond a little self-publicity - after a lifetime of it, it becomes habit, I guess - but he passes the public test:
- If the general public thinks that you are a magician, then you are -
... And Mr Berglas is a Man of Mystery for millions of people. Across continents.
Thanks for the publication.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33108 - 04/30/07 01:48 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I must agree with Mr. Breese that the information of ACAAN in the Britland book isn't at all near to the real effect.
Too little is told.
The book is great, but the Any Card at Any Number section in the book offers only clouds and smoke.
Just an opinion.
I hope one day the recording of Mr.Breese will come out.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33109 - 04/30/07 03:29 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Tom Ladshaw
Registered: 01/21/08
Posts: 44
Loc: Covington, KY
|
Steve Hook writes:
"The second-most amazing fact in this thread is that there is a venue in Cape Town named the Labia Theatre."
You should see the wings.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33110 - 04/30/07 03:34 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Mr Berglas may not be beyond a little self-publicity - after a lifetime of it, it becomes habit, I guess - but he passes the public test:
- If the general public thinks that you are a magician, then you are -
Why blow smoke and vagaries around here?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33112 - 04/30/07 04:29 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Many think the professionals in magic are and should only be talking to the muggles.
If Mr. Berglas wishes to discuss his ACAAN, fine. Or if not... also fine. But why the teasing?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33114 - 05/01/07 02:27 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I don't personally know Mr.Berglas, and so i'll not say any opinion on him.
Neither i've seen him ever perform, and so obviously also i'll never express an opinion on his professional and magic abilities, which all aside, seem great.
The only thing i repeat, is that i don't like effects half explained.
I prefer if they are explained.
And i even prefer if they're not explained at all.
Things half explained like Any Card at Any Number are only smoke and mirrors!
So i'd cut out that part from the very good Britland book.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33115 - 05/01/07 08:23 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The Britland book (which I purchased and sold immediately after reading) contained a great many empty pages, devoid of tips or explanations for those who would pay $200.00 for a mentalisim book.
It wasn't just ACAAN that wasn't tipped or explained, there were many other examples of the same type of treatment of a routine or effect.
The book was marketed to mentalists and magicians, but it really wasn't written for them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33116 - 05/01/07 09:20 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I read the Berglas book and think it is probably the best book ever written on mentalism. Corinda's 13 Steps is also a great book. The difference.....Corinda provides technique and presentational foundations.....The Berglas books tells you how to sell it, how to be a showman and how to create a sensation with simple means. It also spells out the secret to great mentalism.....having steely big ones and being able to think on your feet. And it doesn't hurt to have a great imagination!
The card at any number is a worthless effect unless you have the presentational skills to sell it. Without it, it is just a card trick, not a miracle. It seemed pretty clear to me after reading the description in the book that card at any number is a "multiple out" method, and not every contingincy was explained. The more you know about card magic, the more possibilities are open to you. Think Vernon's "Trick that Cannot be Explained".
Berglas is a brilliant and bold guy, and not everyone is capable of getting the effect he can get from the tricks described in the book. But there are many valuable lessons in those pages.....worth more than 10,000 "card tricks". Berglas teaches how to present miracles!
I'm sure many mental magicians could fool me with Card at any Number.......but I don't think I would care. They are just puzzles. ........Berglas creates astounding effects on people. He's a master showman. Most mentalism leaves me cold. But Berglas is a miracle man.
Pass that horn and I will toot it as well. Berglas rules!
carney
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33117 - 05/01/07 09:37 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Silverking,
This has all been hashed over before. I will repost part of something I wrote five years ago when a few complained in similar vein:
Simply put: If you are looking for a simplistic instruction book that holds your hand, the Berglas book isn’t for you. If you are an amateur who simply wants to collect “secrets,” then the Berglas book isn’t for you. If you don’t like being forced to think and analyze what you’ve read, then the Berglas book isn’t for you. As it says in the front matter, the book is published “in a limited edition of one-thousand copies for distribution to professional performers.”
There’s the key. The true value of the book can only be realized by those with extensive stage experience because only with that level of experiential education can you understand what Berglas is saying: his insights, subtleties, and approach to performing. The amateur, absent this experience and education, might as well be reading ancient Greek or Swahili.
If you are a working professional and want routines that will add immeasurably to your repertoire; if you want to be exposed to the thinking that goes into the creation of a successful career; if you want a number of presentations that extract the absolute maximum in mystery and entertainment from the routine, then this is the book to buy. On that basis, the book priced far below its actual value. There are numerous items that are, easily, “worth the price of the book,” but they take stage presence and address to carry them off. This is high level material, not for the faint of heart.
There are several highly valuable secrets that he has “left in plain sight” including one that obviously made him hundreds of thousand of pounds. That Berglas was as generous as he was is amazing to me….yet people complain about the lack of clarity in a silly card trick when other, far more valuable information is spelled out in detail.
The idea that the book is not “definitive” only exposes the short comings of the reviewer. This is nicely covered by a line delivered by Gene Hackman, playing Lex Luthor in the first Superman film: “Why is it that some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it nothing more than a simple adventure story and someone else can read the ingredients on a gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the Universe?”
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33118 - 05/01/07 09:42 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Larry Horowitz
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 28
Loc: L.A.
|
John Carney is one hundred percent correct!
I met Mr.Berglas just after the book was out and the controversy regarding ACAAN was on the internet. We discussed that magicians didn't "get" what the book was about.
If you can't figure out how ACAAN is done from the available material, (John just GAVE it to you!), then you probably could not perform the effect with any worthwhile results.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33119 - 05/01/07 10:02 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Is there a gap between what one wants to learn and what has been offered?
What specifically is the purpose of writing and offering to magicians a description of a magic performance from a purported muggle's eye view?
As to how to manage fifty two decks of cards... a mnemonic would do. To word-play with Mr Knepper... or do another one. It can't really all be about the methods can it? Or should it?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33120 - 05/01/07 10:30 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It doesn't take long for the illuminati to attempt to portray any poster who doesn't agree with them as a bumbling amateur lacking in skills and/or of a diminished mental ability.
David, I do a great ACAAN and have done for 30+ years. I'm also fully aware of what the Britland book 'was' and what it 'wasn't', I owned it and read it twice before selling it.
I'm really not as stupid or uninformed as you would have me be in order to fit the mold you offer explaining WHY I didn't understand the Britland book.
I didn't like it! (can I say that here?)....it's no deeper than that.
done and peace.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33121 - 05/01/07 10:59 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Okay, I've a question that maybe someone can answer or Richard has knowledge of. Mark Lewis is out of the UK and he met David Berglas for the first time when he was 16 (when Mark was 16) so they go back some 45 or 50 years. Mark said there was a trick that was David favorite that he doesn't like to discuss and will never publish and it isn't the any card at any number. Anyone know about this trick? Mark, who had some instruction from Berglas, doesn't know the trick.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33122 - 05/01/07 11:10 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
As to how to manage fifty two decks of cards... a mnemonic would do.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33124 - 05/01/07 11:17 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Not sure what 52 decks has to do with anything. If the trick was: A Card at Any Number, that would explain it, but the trick is: Any Card at Any Number. The math goes much higher.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33125 - 05/01/07 11:38 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
So the man wants to keep one for himself. Good for him. End of story.
Since the book came up again, I'll tell you this: the pickpocket routine described in the cabaret act - in which 5 watch steals are announced under test conditions - is impossible. Yet I appreciated reading about it, as it open one's eyes to other presentational approaches. That, beyond the historical perspective of the book, is what made it interesting.
But there was a fair dollop of B.S. within the pages, no doubt about it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33126 - 05/01/07 11:42 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Are the "other" 51 cards supposed to be blank?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33127 - 05/01/07 11:59 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Your original post seemed to imply that the method for ACAAN was to have 52 decks set up, and I was pointing out that 52 decks don't begin to cover the possibilities when the effect is ANY card at ANY number. You would need 2704 decks.
Edit: Sorry, that wasn't so helpful. Look at the numbers again, John. 52 decks covers all possibilities for any named card to appear at any given position.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33128 - 05/01/07 11:59 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I haven't yet had the opportunity of reading the article - but have been fortunate enough to spend time with David and see first hand just what a remarkable showman he is.
He is without a doubt one of the great performers the art of magic has ever known. He is a true man of mystery - a wonder worker ... and somebody who fulfills the role of master showman to a tee. Living legend comes to mind.
Personally, I find most magicians boring ... seldom do I find them entertaining and once in a blue moon I find them mystifying. David, however, is a breed apart. To see him perform - is to understand the instinctive element of astonishment that is so often lacking in today's arena. As with most things - we don't truly appreciate something until its gone.
IMHO, these petty squabbles are in poor taste.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33129 - 05/01/07 12:02 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
You would need 2704 decks
Assume deck 1 is in new deck order. For deck 2, take a new deck and put the bottom card on the top. For deck 3, take a new deck and put the bottom card on the top and then take the next card on the bottom and put it on top. Continue like this through deck 52.
In each of the decks, each card appears at a unique number. In the next deck, it is at the next consecutive number. If it is in position 52, it is in position 1 in the next deck.
It only takes 52 decks.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33130 - 05/01/07 02:24 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Sometimes it helps to look at a simpler example. So, let's try a new effect:
Any Ace at Any Number!
But the numbers are 1 through 4 (not 1 through 52). So in this case would I need 4 packets of Aces or would I need 16 packets (4 X 4)?
I'll call my Aces 1, 2, 3, and 4. Packet 1 is in this order, from the top:
1
2
3
4
I'll move one card from the top to the bottom three times to arrange three more packets. So, left to right, those four packets have my Aces in the four arrangements shown (packets are left to right, order of cards is top to bottom):
1 2 3 4
2 3 4 1
3 4 1 2
4 1 2 3
So, Ace #1 is the first card in packet 1, the 4th card in packet 2, the 3rd card in packet 3, and the 2nd card in packet 4. Similarly, each Ace occupies each position in each of the four packets.
So only 4 packets are required. Amazing. But not that great of a trick.
Gene Taylor
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33131 - 05/01/07 02:54 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I haven't yet had the opportunity of reading the article - but have been fortunate enough to spend time with David and see first hand just what a remarkable showman he is.
He is without a doubt one of the great performers the art of magic has ever known. He is a true man of mystery - a wonder worker ... and somebody who fulfills the role of master showman to a tee. Living legend comes to mind.
Personally, I find most magicians boring ... seldom do I find them entertaining and once in a blue moon I find them mystifying. David, however, is a breed apart. To see him perform - is to understand the instinctive element of astonishment that is so often lacking in today's arena. As with most things - we don't truly appreciate something until its gone.
IMHO, these petty squabbles are in poor taste.
Still, he was merely following the lead of others.
Joe E. Pike
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33132 - 05/01/07 03:30 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Actually Joe, had you read the post you would know that it was from a post I made in 2002 as an answer to the whining then extant about the lack of detail on the Berglas Effect.
Richard Kaufman liked it so much that he asked permission to attach it to the Genii review of the Berglas book. David Berglas must have found merit in what I said because he sent me a nice note thanking me for my observations.
The point I was making, which seems lost, is that Berglas wrote his book for professional performers, not amateurs. To understand what he wrote requires a degree of performing experience that most amateurs never have. If you bought the book and failed to understand that, too bad.
As I said, to the working performer, the book is solid gold for a variety of reasons that require professional performing experience to understand. Every professional I respect thinks highly of the Berglas book, so I'm in good company.
Apparently I'm considered "petty" when I point out that not all opinions are equal and that some, because of experience and education, are worth more than others.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33133 - 05/01/07 03:41 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Bob Farmer
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 234
Loc: Short card above selection.
|
Some footnotes for posterity:
I explained a very good Ace At Any Number in my Genii column (though I don't remember which one -- Richard?).
I will be marketing in the very near future, "The Bammo Dekronomicon," one of my takes on the ACAAN plot, but one you can do immediately (and the deck is on the table BEFORE the card and number are named and the magician does not touch the deck after this happens).
Interested ACAANers can email at Trickmail@sympatico.ca and I'll add you to the notice list when the trick is released.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33134 - 05/01/07 03:54 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I agree with you on many things David, but the concept of the 'superior opinion' isn't one of them.
An opinion is an opinion bro.... and everybody has one.... and each one of those opinions is as valid as the next one.
David, here's a quote from a post you made earlier today in another thread:
"The simple solution is to treat people the way you want to be treated, with respect and dignity".
Might this include respecting their opinions?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33135 - 05/01/07 04:21 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The idea that all opinions have equal weight is nonsense and something that you don't believe in yourself because you don't apply it in your own life.
You don't apply that concept when you visit a doctor or a lawyer or your accountant, paying them for their time, advice, diagnosis, tax information, etc. If all opinions have equal weight, why not just ask someone on the street or a relative when you need information about health, or taxes?
I respect opinions that have weight precisely because of education, experience, and a host of other things.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33137 - 05/01/07 04:26 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Silverking - With all due respect, I tend to listen and agree with the opinion from someone that is highly educated and experienced on the subject matter (Doctor versus Graduate Student, etc.). Of course, this is just my opinion.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33138 - 05/01/07 05:11 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I appreciate that you're trying to put words in my mouth and imply that I was including folks like Doctors and Scientists in my statement but we ARE and WERE talking about a mentalist, not a guy who does open heart surgery or delivers babies.
There's no degree for mentalists yet
I see your obfuscation of the issue as a lame or last attempt at trying to stay on top of the conversation (to 'win' as it were) ,so I'll assume the general conversation is either over or winding down quickly.
When the swearing starts, the rational conversation is already over.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33139 - 05/01/07 05:34 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
NCMarsh
Registered: 02/16/08
Posts: 270
Loc: Tampa, Florida
|
No, we're talking about a personal student of Frakson with decades of experience in front of live audiences!
Now, I know very little about "silverking," but -- unless you have similar experience and education -- your opinion is worth less than his when it comes to the value of a book to highly experienced performing professionals.
If training from one of the premier magical performers of the twentieth century and decades of experience do not qualify David to discuss the value of the book to an experienced professional -- than I cannot imagine what more would.
You want to argue that the book is essentially without value because it was without value to you.
David is pointing out that it has tremendous value to the audience for which it was intended.
Now, I never made it through a reading of the Berglas book cover-to-cover. I hopped and skipped through it and had mixed feelings. I came away with a number of different (and valuable!) lessons, but also felt like there was a lot of self-serving padding...I had received the book as a gift, and so I felt no disappointment whatsoever because it had cost me nothing...but I had the suspicion that I would have felt at least some disappointment had I been a paying customer...
But then I looked at the people who were talking about the value of the book -- David, Eric Mead (look up the original Genii review), and now John Carney...these guys have no finachial stake in the project and -- in any case -- i'm pretty sure that the book is out of print by now...
I know that, earlier on, there were a lot of books that I dismissed as not very valuable -- certainly not as valuable as the latest trick -- only to find, years later, that I just wasn't ready for them at the time...
I'm 24 years old and have been performing professionally for less than 4 years. When I was born, David Alexander had been earning his living from magic for quite a long while.
I find it very hard to say "John, David, and Eric; notwithstanding the thousands and thousands of hours that you have in front of paying audiences, I can judge that you are wrong and that this book -- which itself is the results of decades of experience and a highly successful career -- is not valuable."
I think that the sensible approach, instead of dismissing the thing and coming to the conclusion that the experts just aren't as clear sighted as you are, is to put the book on the shelf and to come back to it later in your career. That's the approach that I am taking.
I know that bullsh*t is a strong word, but I think it is entirely appropriate...
I am strongly "anti-expert" when it comes to issues that can be resolved through reason...and I think our culture and news media are overly dependent on self-proclaimed experts...but, what makes for effective magic is not something that you can ever come to through theory divorced from long experience...
I think that the honest thing is to acknowledge that, in magic, not all opinions are equal..
When there appears to be a consensus among experts (and I have yet to see anyone I consider to be an expert in this field disparage the Berglas book), I think a little bit of humility is in order when it comes to dismissing the value of the work of an expert.
Best,
N.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33140 - 05/01/07 05:41 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Silverking (whoever that is) wrote:
I appreciate that you're trying to put words in my mouth and imply that I was including folks like Doctors and Scientists in my statement but we ARE and WERE talking about a mentalist, not a guy who does open heart surgery or delivers babies.
There's no degree for mentalists yet
I see your obfuscation of the issue as a lame or last attempt at trying to stay on top of the conversation (to 'win' as it were) ,so I'll assume the general conversation is either over or winding down quickly.
When the swearing starts, the rational conversation is already over.
__________________________________________
No, I didn't put words in your mouth...you didn't put enough words in your own mouth to clarify your own position, which you seem to be changing anyway.
True, there's no "degree" for mentalists, but since we have no idea who you are, what your stage experience is, we can't give any weight to your opinion as being informed or educated.
You didn't like the Berglas book, fine, but was it your shortcomings that caused your dislike or something that Britland and/or Berglas did or didn't do in the writing? You want to have an opinion, fine....you want to announce your opinion publicly, be prepared to defend it if others don't agree.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33141 - 05/01/07 05:42 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
another thread lost.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33143 - 05/01/07 06:50 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
No fish here David....try another pond.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33144 - 05/01/07 06:59 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Dustin Stinett
Dark Fascist Overlord
Registered: 07/22/01
Posts: 6343
Loc: Southern California
|
Huh?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33145 - 05/01/07 07:14 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The idea that every opinion is as valid as the next one is ridiculous. No one whose opinion is worth a damn has ever said this.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33146 - 05/01/07 07:17 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
While every opinion is valid for the person who holds it, not every opinion is useful to others.
Knowing the subjectivity of an opinion is what permits us to consider the source.
Wasn't there an old Roman quote about matters of taste being beyond dispute?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33148 - 05/01/07 07:31 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I just appreciate that Richard is able to document these type of interviews with the senior members of the art and giving them the credit due them.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33149 - 05/01/07 07:50 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
If someone were to ask my opinion on how to go about doing mentalism well, I would say that he needed two books.
Corinda is the toolbox, and The Berglas book is the blueprint. Without a blueprint, the tools are worthless.
Whether or not you find value in the book........
............. depends on what you value.
To each his own.
carney
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33150 - 05/01/07 09:02 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
David Alexander wrote:
Apparently I'm considered "petty" when I point out that not all opinions are equal and that some, because of experience and education, are worth more than others.
The use of the word petty was derived from the post of another thread contributor who used it to dismiss the worth of "silverking's" contribution - I was just flinging it back in his face.
Joe
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33151 - 05/01/07 09:28 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Boy, I don't know what I was thinking. I was looking at the problem in completely the wrong way. Thanks to those who clarified the 52 deck math. I was way off.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33152 - 05/01/07 10:21 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Now, I know very little about "silverking," but -- unless you have similar experience and education -- your opinion is worth less than his when it comes to the value of a book to highly experienced performing professionals.
In any case, following your logic, your opinions have no place here, since you claim you are only 24 years old. So why should anybody listen to the points you are making?
Joe
PS. I don't necessarily follow your logic. I'm just explicating it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33153 - 05/01/07 10:36 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks for a great article! I enjoyed it a great deal.
Even without being in the publishing business, I'm aware that a great deal of time and effort went into the Berglas article, which is particularly impressive since you have to put out an issue every month. It shows a real love for what you do. Thanks again.
I particularly liked the story about Gus Southall, a writer for a journal titled, "The Budget," where he accused David Berglas of using confederates. I laughed out loud when I read about their later encounter.
You did a great job of tracking his career from it's start to the present, with both prose and pictures. I have a special shelf for certain very highly-valued issues of Genii Magazine, and this issue will go on that shelf.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33154 - 05/01/07 10:43 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
NCMarsh
Registered: 02/16/08
Posts: 270
Loc: Tampa, Florida
|
Hmm, yes. But who's to decide on such matters?
In any case, following your logic, your opinions have no place here, since you claim you are only 24 years old. So why should anybody listen to the points you are making?
You missed the boat completely.
The claim is not that silverking's opinion "has no place here."
The point is that his opinion of the Berglas book does not hold equal weight to that of experienced professionals.
Following that argument out, the conclusion is that yes -- as a 24 year old with only a few years as a professional performer -- my opinion should not carry the same weight as that of David Berglas, David Alexander, John Carney, Eric Mead, and their peers.
Silverking was very vocal about how "each one of those opinions is as valid as the next one." (emphasis mine)
Best,
N.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33155 - 05/01/07 10:47 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I'm sorry? When was it demonstrated that Alexander was superior to silverking? You say it like it's a fact that has been proven here in this thread.
This is all subjective... like opinions.
By the way, this is no slight on Alexander's abilities. I have no idea about those, just as I have no idea about silverking's abilities. That's the point I'm making.
Best,
Joe
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33156 - 05/01/07 11:45 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
NCMarsh
Registered: 02/16/08
Posts: 270
Loc: Tampa, Florida
|
I'm sorry? When was it demonstrated that Alexander was superior to silverking? You say it like it's a fact that has been proven here in this thread.
Silverking said that the Berglas book was filled with "empty pages" and was not written for magicians and mentalists. Dismissing the value of a book that was the product of a life's work, and of -- I am sure -- hundreds of hours.
D.A. has said that the value of the book is not apparent without extensive performing experience. The sense of this was strongly seconded in Eric Mead's review in Genii where he referred to the ACAAN section as (and this is not a direct quote but a paraphrase from memory) "notes from one expert to another."
David Alexander has made his living from magic since -- at least -- the mid-1960's. He was a personal student of Frakson.
David has claimed that the most valuable lessons in the Berglas book are ones he was only ready to learn because of his experience.
Silverking found the book without value to him and from that projected that the book was without value (see the above post about empty pages and the book not being written for magicians and mentalists).
David's opinion is not about the value of the book simply, but of its value to experienced professional performers. This is a judgement he is clearly qualified to make.
Now, in contrast to David (who is very open about who he is and where he is from -- which allows us to put his opinions in context), silverking gives us only that he is in Canada.
If silverking has similar credentials, he has no reason not to share them. If he is a successful, highly experienced professional, than his opinion is relevant to the usefulness of the book to experienced professionals (to whom the book is clearly intended based on the statement in the front matter).
But if he isn't, and without a statement from him there is no reason to believe that he is, then what he has to say has little relevance to the narrow question of the value of the book to its intended audience.
Of course, if it is of value to experienced professionals, then the pages are hardly "empty" as he claims above.
this kind of thing has an unfortunate emotional edge to it. People don't like to think that there are lessons they may not be ready for...and I think get defensive because they think it is some kind of judgement of them...
It isn't. There is nothing wrong with being less experienced -- its all part of the ride...
In magic, for whatever reason, everyone wants to be seen as an expert...and so we have the young guy taking it upon himself to give out "magic's oscars"...
And so Silverking takes umbrage at the idea that he isn't in the intended audience for this book...If he is, again, he should be open about who he is and what his background is -- so that we can give the appropriate weight to what he has to say...
If he is not, what is so offensive about not being in the intended audience for a book?
People who are clearly experts -- Eric Mead and John Carney -- have talked publicly about how valuable the book is.
Silverking casually dismisses the book.
Casually dismisses years of Berglas' life and hard won experience laid out on a silver platter for the student.
Are Mead and Carney just not as perceptive as silverking to see that the emperor has no clothes?
Or is it possible, just possible, that there are lessons that he and I are not yet ready for?
I think the reason that I am so adamant about this kind of thing -- this "everybody-in-magic's-opinion-is-equally-valid -- is that there is an explosion of information out there...
With all the internet experts, and everybody with equally valid opinions, the student has no where to turn for qualified information...
I think we need to be honest as a community.
I think we need to be clear that the guys who have sweated for years to build successful careers -- the Denny Haneys, David Alexanders, Bob Sheets etc. etc. -- really are experts and their views, when it comes to learning effective magic for muggles, should be given greater weight than the views of some anonymous guy...
Alright, rant over...I'm headed to bed
Best,
N.
P.S. About my "claim" of being 24 (I have never before had anyone in an argument challenge my statement that I was young and inexperienced), you can take a gander at http://illusionartistry.com/bio.html for information about me. I think you'll clearly see a 24 year old dweeb at the very begining of his career.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33157 - 05/02/07 12:04 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Hey. Who used up all the bold?
I think we need to be clear that the guys who have sweated for years to build successful careers -- the Denny Haneys, David Alexanders, Bob Sheets etc. etc. -- really are experts and their views, when it comes to learning effective magic for muggles, should be given greater weight than the views of some anonymous guy...
That being said, when someone says, "I didn't like this book because there wasn't a lot of concrete information in it, it was mostly publicity" (or words to that effect) I think that is a valid comment. I am also happy to read a valid counter argument. However, for me, a "name magician" (any name magician) saying, "you just can't appreciate the value of what is not (?) being said in this book because you don't have my experience", is not a valid counter argument.
Also, and this is no reflection on any individual, but rather a general statement - which you may disagree with - just because a person is a "name magician" in the sense that they are a big fish in the small clique of magicians who are written about in magic magazines, it does not necessarily follow res ipsa loquitor that they are any more successful in the business of magic than a person who posts on a magic forum but has never been featured in any magic magazine. The fact is, we often cannot know the breadth of experience of most of the people on this board. So let's not assume, and let's not dismiss so cavalierly. I have NO idea about silverking, but his initial comments, to me, appeared to be rational and reasonably held, valid, opinions. I haven't seen any input from anyone subsequently that would make me think otherwise - although there seems to be a lot of emotion in slamming the guy.
Of course, if silverking chimes in and says he's a 12 year old, I may revise my views.
Best,
Joe E. Pike
PS. It's like the great New Yorker cartoon with two dogs sitting in front of as PC and one dog saying, "Nobody knows you're a dog on the Internet".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33159 - 05/02/07 01:45 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Joe, I'm not 12, I'm 50 as of last October. I've been active in magic and a member of my local ring since the age of 21.
I'm not a professional because I only perform for kids in hospital and adults having mental illness .I've done these gigs for over 20 years and receive no pay for them, making me an amateur.
Presumably this amateur status makes my opinion somehow diminished and/or unwelcome as stated by the VERY SHORT list of professionals who take umberage at my comments on both the Britland book and Berglas's penchant for B.S. in his self-promotion.
Last point, I won't be bullied into giving my name and address on this or any other internet web forum. Lots of folks here on Genii and many more on the Green Pages know who I am, not that it matters in order to hold a conversaton.
Regarless, I won't debate the issue. It's just a personal choice.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33160 - 05/02/07 01:47 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Holy shit. The 12 year old comment was a joke. You're like a drowning man lashing out at his saviour.
My apologies to David Alexander and the boy wizard. But mostly to myself for wasting 20 minutes of my life I'll never get back.
G'nite.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33161 - 05/02/07 04:32 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Thanks to those who clarified the 52 deck math. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33162 - 05/02/07 04:35 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Bob Farmer
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 234
Loc: Short card above selection.
|
I can't imagine an article as interesting, well-researched and well-written in any other magic magazine.
And this isn't the first time -- Richard and Genii have continually produced some of the best magic reporting extant.
P.S. The only kings whose opinions I respect (because I know who they are): B.B. King, Albert King and Freddy King.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33163 - 05/02/07 05:25 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I respect a lot Stephen King!
And myself: Crimsonking
Jokes apart, i think that if people who are in the businness like Mr.Carney and others say that the Britland book about Berglas is full of gold for professionals, i believe them.
I think that all people have the right to express an opinion,
but obviously the more competent, expert and well versed in the businness people are, the more weight their opinions got.
If a person is 30 years that study insects obviously they can recognize a lot of variety of different insects.
Their eye is more prepared and their knowledge more sharped.
Obviously Mr. Silverking has the right to distaste the book.
Personally i loved the Berglas book.
The only thing i'll never get satisfied with was the semi explanation of ACAAN.
I obviously am not expert like others,
but i think that various great tips were explained in that chapter,
but the core of the effect was left aside.
Maybe the expert in the field from that tips could rebuild the core and the effect.
But i think that also for them from that chapter something is concealed, not written.
It is only a partial reconstruction, where not all the clues were written down.
Like a great cooking receipit, an ingredient or two were left aside.
My curiosity is if other great cooks like Mr.Carney and others, could reconstruct those missing ingredients!
Or maybe the ingredients were only missing in front of my not expert and sharped eyes!
Crim
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33168 - 05/02/07 11:26 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
re Guess I'll have to find a copy and read it
Thanks Richard. Fun article and also those items using the 3D glasses to enjoy.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33169 - 05/02/07 02:16 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
personally I loved this issue of genii.. it was one of the most enjoyable issues I've read for some time.. it provides a great insight into berglas, and brought back memories of his television appearences, especially the onesI think on the secret cabaret when he talked about the blind fold drive/object hunt round london for the chinese slipper..
I regretted not buying the britland book back in 2002.. and th issues urged me to try and get hold of a copy.. after many calls, and emails (thanks to those in the US who helped track down a copy) I managed to obtain one this evening.. ACAAN explained or not.. I'm buying it for the history, the insight and the potential hints at how to perform excellent magic, if it makes me think of something in a different way, it will have been worth the money and effort in getting it..
Thanks Richard for a great Genii this month.. I'd love to see some more like this covering a particular well respected performer..
well done!!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33170 - 05/02/07 03:21 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I would like to weigh in on the pseudonym issue. In my own case, I would argue that it makes no difference what name I post under, since very few people would recognize my real name. Richard, I met you for the first time at the David Ben show in DC a few weeks ago. I have bought several books from you. Jim Riser may or may not remember that I have bought a few items from him. Denny Haney knows me, but he does not post here, nor as far as I can tell does he even read this forum.
Since I rarely perform in public, and have published none of my work, there is really no way for the vast majority of the forum participants to associate my real name or my face with any accomplishments that I may or may not have in magic. Forum participants can associate my pseudonym with the handful of posts that I have made here. Whether it's my real name or not, I'm just as unknown to everyone here.
Once several years ago Thomas Wayne was blathering on and on about the pseudonym issue. Previous to that I made a few posts endorsing his fine craftsmanship. After one of his more abrasive posts, I commented that since I have complimented his work under a pseudonym, I guess that means that my opinion of his work means less and that people should not pay any attention to me.
If well-know people post under pseudonyms, one could argue that they have something to hide. For those of us who are unknown, revealing our names adds nothing to the discussions. Feel free to disregard my opinion since it comes from a guy with a pseudonym whose real name also means nothing to you.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33171 - 05/02/07 03:32 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
While your real name may or may not mean anything to some or all of us, you are known to someone as no one lives in a vacuum.
You’ve mentioned two people I know and respect. Absent any personal knowledge of you, if one wants to carry it far enough, a simple phone call or email to someone I know and trust who verifies your bona fides is enough for me.
"Anonymous credibility" seems an oxymoron to me.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33172 - 05/02/07 04:19 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Back to ACAAN, frequently in my patter for revealing the named card at the chosen number, I actually claim that the odds are 52x52 to one against success, even though I know full well what the true odds are. Sometimes I will inflate the odds even more. Since I'm blatantly lying anyway, I may as well pile it on even deeper.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33173 - 05/02/07 04:40 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
David, I really don't have anything to hide, but I don't have anything to prove either. I'm not selling anything. It makes no difference to me whether anyone pays any attention to my posts.
I wasn't trying to name-drop, but those guys I mentioned are the only forum participants I could think of that my real name would mean anything to. Denny's an old friend, and I'm probably his only customer in Hollywood, MD. Call him if you want, but you won't learn anything very interesting. I'm just a guy who has read a lot and practiced a lot for over 30 years.
I only made my comments because I find it amusing that everyone gets so worked up over this issue.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33174 - 05/02/07 05:02 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
N.B.: this is not a personal attack on silverking, ecphora, or any other forum participant.
Many reasons (both theoretical and practical) have been given on this forum to justify the use of pseudonyms, and there are merits (however slight, perhaps) to many of them. But let’s not forget that the behavior of pseudonymous (or anonymous) social interaction on a mass scale is largely a byproduct of the internet.
Is there significance to the idea that people often select the least personal way of identifying themselves in a medium which is also the least personal? Or does such behavior occur simply because the technology permits it?
IMHO, those who stand on the principal that their ideas should stand or fall on the merits (and not on their identity) miss the point. And those who argue for personal safety (setting aside child safety issues) also seem to miss the point, or at least they seem to live by standards that are arguably rather incongruous: it seems obvious that one’s personal safety is far more at risk in personal or telephonic interaction, where one would never dream of interacting anonymously or under an assumed name.
If I attended any sort of meeting, would I introduce myself as “magicam”? Of course not. If I telephoned somebody and hoped to have any sort of meaningful exchange, would I introduce myself as “magicam”? Never. If I wrote a letter (or e-mail) to somebody with the same hopes, would I sign my letter under the name “magicam”? No.
The best argument for the use of real names? Folks like to know who they’re interacting with. It's that simple. It is human nature and reflective of the fact that we are social creatures. And, really, it’s a matter of basic courtesy. Why is it that, on the internet, some of us choose to conduct ourselves in a manner that would, by universal social standards, be considered rude in any other type of social interaction?
Clay H. Shevlin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33175 - 05/02/07 05:18 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Someday I'd like to do an ACAAN. My problem is that when performing I seperate my "what to do" from my thinking as regards the "how to do" so memory / formula things are very tough for me.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33176 - 05/02/07 05:51 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Jonathan,
No doubt, it's mentally challenging, but very rewarding too. I have to do it over and over again for my wife for about a week before I feel confident enough to do it for people. I use the method in a very popular Hermetic Press book, where you need to do some memorization and a little subtraction in your head, but for some reason it's hard to talk and subtract at the same time. Properly built up, it's about as strong as card tricks get. The plot is simple and people will remember it for a long time.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33177 - 05/02/07 05:53 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Honest question for those registered under your full names (and assuming it's the same name fastened to you in performance): does the prospect of a delighted spectator/friend/family member googling your full name and finding their way to your activity here (whether it be hawking wares, arguing over attribution of a sleight, discussing new commercial effects etc.) strike you as maybe a little, I dunno, less than befitting the purportedly 'arcane' nature of our craft here?
I'm not so much speaking to the established full time performers/historians/collectors here as I am the amateurs, since I'd have to assume the latter are far better represented.
Just throwing out an aspect of this that I don't think has been raised yet...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33178 - 05/02/07 09:29 PM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Back to ACAAN, frequently in my patter for revealing the named card at the chosen number, I actually claim that the odds are 52x52 to one against success, even though I know full well what the true odds are. Sometimes I will inflate the odds even more. Since I'm blatantly lying anyway, I may as well pile it on even deeper.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33179 - 05/03/07 12:16 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I've just been reading the book "The Mind and Magic of David Berglas" (haven't had a chance to read the Genii interview yet, but I definitely will!).
In this book there is mention of one of David's earlier books: "David Berglas Reveals -- Nearly Everything". Apparently it is a Dutch book (I presume that means it is written in Dutch?), published in 1967.
Does anyone have any more info on this book? I'm guessing it's long out of print, but is there any chance of finding a copy? What would be a ball-park figure price-wise?
Any and all info is greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Jason
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33180 - 05/03/07 03:29 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
This works great if you're performing for John Lovick.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33181 - 05/03/07 04:04 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Ian Kendall
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 307
Loc: Edinburgh
|
It cuts both ways; I post under my name, yet have no credibility...perhaps it's because it's not my _real_ name.
Yep, that's it. Definitley.
Take care,
Peter Wyngarde (Mrs)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33182 - 05/03/07 05:14 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
re: opinions (hoping that this avoids the Chief Genii proscription)
In a "hard" science, opinions are not created equal.
In a "soft" science, without dissenting opinions there would be no progress!
In art, opinions are relatively democratic!!
I've met folk who find "Strong Magic" to be windy, dull, and meatless. Others swear by it. Both positions are, frankly, respectable.
Some actually claim to appreciate the "meta-secret" in "Protocols". Others feel cheated. Both positions are, frankly, respectable.
We've heard both sides concerning the Berglas book. I suspect that there is validity on both sides. As is typical, very few concrete examples have been brought forward in support of either side. Mr. Asselin (salut!) being the exception -- whose posts are consequently far more valuable than most.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33183 - 05/03/07 08:15 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Doug Peters has a decent point.
The examples he give all create a similar, vocal, either or division in discussions, on and off the forum.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33184 - 05/03/07 09:36 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Anonymous
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Oh Ian - Peter Wyngarde, you're showing your age!
Cheers
Andrew
Controller
Department S
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#33185 - 05/03/07 09:37 AM
Re: Berglas interview
|
Brad Henderson
Registered: 01/17/08
Posts: 397
Loc: austin, tx
|
Mike Rogers shared a story with me from the old days of the Gemini forum. Mike had two log ins. One was his real name, the other a fake one. He would play games. He would go in as the fake name and say things he knew to be true and have them shot down by "experts" UNTIL he logged back in under his real name and agreed with the fake poster - at which point public opinion seemed to sway as if by magic. While I do not recall the specific dynamics he managed to use, his point stuck clearly - in magic often the name associated with a point is far more important than the quality of the point itself.
Brad
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Dustin Stinett, Jim Maloney
|
127 registered
(Magic Randy, Tom Frame, mrgoat, Mark.Lewis, Paul Gordon, Anthony Owen, Asser Andersen, Glenn Bishop, Denis Behr, Tom Ladshaw, Phil Schwartz, David Lira, James Kernen, AnthonyBrahams, Ally, Mike P, Erik Hemming, Gord, Harry Entwistle, Keith Raygor, Mike Carr, brownbeauty, Jeff Pierce Magic, Jeremy B, Cardologist, Bob Gerdes, Kevin Connolly, jimmo, Gary Kosnitzky, amp, Magic Newswire, Matthew Field, Bob Farmer, IrishMagicNews, Jeff Eline, Doug King, jwizard, Sebastien L., Jacky Kahan, Huggie, Carl Skenes, Marco Pusterla, Jim Maloney, Eoin O'Hare, Dan Thiel, Joe McIntyre, Steve Bryant, Larry Stangel, Robert Toomer, Jon Elion, 8 invisible)
and 624 anonymous users online.
|
|
|
