The article How To Be Suave got me thinking about the differences between challenge mentalism and challenge magic. Mentalism is often insistent on a collaborative element. The magician can get away with a degree of arrogance backed up with skill, but mentalism often requires falling back on a more collaborative mindset to assuage the challenger.
There are some circumstances in mentalism that have a more antagonistic approach. Much of these challenge mind reading effects are reserved for large publicity stunts. The type of effects that are meant to get your name in the paper and act as proof of your claim such as hiding a key around town and locating it while blindfolded or predicting the outcome of a major event such as a sports game.
The ubiquitous bank night has a degree of challenge to it. It is a game between the performer and the participants. And in the majority of bank night routines, it is the performer left with the money. Frankly, I find the methods in which mentalists attempt to regain the audience’s good will more interesting than the actual methodology of bank night routines, from Richard Osterlind giving out lottery tickets to Ted Lesley giving out stuffed teddy bears.
Test condition effects are probably the most applicable type of challenge based mentalism for the social performer. Of course your family and friends know you are not an expert in NLP or capable of predicting the future, and your inability to talk to a cashier proves you are no empath. So we will take a page out of magic and showmanship and lower the claim to fit the proof.
Uri Geller was excellent at approaching these types of test condition challenges. Much of his career was based upon providing proof of his claims. But the way he went about it provides a unique insight as to how to approach these types of challenges with grace. Geller encouraged others to join him, despite the initial nature of the challenge as a test. He pivoted it into a collaborative experience. The other person had to focus on the drawing, they had to focus their energy on the spoon. If Geller succeeded, they succeeded with him. When Geller failed, he was apologetic. He didn’t get mad, he didn’t fall back on stock lines to try and be clever. He apologized to the person. He made an effort to get them on his side.
Challenges don’t always play out in your favor. There is a famous moment on the Barbara Walters show in which James Randi is tasked with recreating a feat of celebrity psychic Uri Geller. And Randi succeeded! And his magic buddies loved it. But Walters was less than enthused. There was a sharp contrast between the challenge of Uri Geller’s abilities and the proof of fraud by James Randi. What Randi did was incredible, but he embarrassed Walters. On a surface level, it was a battle between Geller and Randi, but really it was a challenge between Randi and Walters.
Challenge based mentalism comes in many forms, from publicity and stage routines to test condition type effects. The attitude in performing challenge-based mentalism routines can change with the context of our performance and the claims we are making. But it is important to remember that mentalism may be a related art to magic, but the way it is presented can make a significant difference. James Randi approached the Barbara Walters interview from the perspective of a magician doing mentalism, Geller approached the challenge from a more mentalism-based mindset. And the reactions demonstrate how different challenge-based approaches can be.
Note from the editor: Please join me in appreciating the conflict of the “to”s in the capitalization of the title. I sincerely apologize for missing the improper capitalization last post. Everyone has been issued a full refund.