|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
Benjamin Garth Mack New user 36 Posts |
I talk about Copperfield performing a coin trick in a 2,000 seat auditorium. Maybe this won't be considered on topic...but here's an essay I wrote for a book called This Is Not A Game by Dave Dave Szulborski. I give a take on the experience of magic and how this experience is created in ARGs, alternate Reality Games...I hope you'll enjoy this perspective and I hope you don't find this post an intrusion on this site.
Respectfully, Ben Mack Immersive Realities The Structure of Magic By Ben Mack Magic is the act of facilitating a phantasmagorical experience, the acceptance of the world where natural laws don’t have such a firm grasp on reality. I grew up a junior member of The Magic Castle—If ever there was a real Hogwartz, this was it. David Copperfield lectured to our membership, Dai Vernon tutored us and Diana Zimmerman managed us. The Magic Castle wasn’t open to kids interested in magic. Instead, The Magic Castle held biannual auditions and initiated those who demonstrated proficiency of craft and potential for expertise. The older a candidate was, the better they had to be. It took me two tries to be accepted. Natural aptitude was rarely enough to muster the goods necessary for acceptance. Virtually every candidate had been tutored. Lorenzo Clark was my mentor. I called him Larry. Larry not only taught me sleight-of-hand, called prestidigitation, but he also taught me the psychology of perception. In order to create a sustainable illusion, one must have a commanding grasp of perception. A magician must transcend fooling their audience and enter the realm of trust where an audience grants you their willing suspension of disbelief. Magic is not a thing or a physical act, but a state of mind that approaches the sublime but is more aptly referred to as phantasmagorical. Magic occurs at the intersection of a performer and an audience. There is intentionality to the perception. A stone that looks like an eagle is not magic, regardless of whether or not it is carved to represent the physical traits of an eagle. A sculpture maybe a catalyst to an altered state of mind, but I am reticent to call a sculpture magical. Some panoramas feel almost magical to me, but real magic is dynamic and ephemeral. Magic is the process of engineering an experience where reality emerges as it cannot be, and yet the audience is compelled to set aside their disbelief and flow with the experience as long as it lasts. Creating an illusion entails tweaking our visual prejudices. We drop a coin, and it falls. We know this to be true; we have seen the force of gravity pull objects to Earth since before we had words to articulate the phenomena. What most non-perceptual psychologists DON’T recognize is the extent that our mind projects our expectations, our visual prejudices, onto our sight. If a magician creates the physical gesture of dropping a coin from one hand to another, yet palms the coin so it doesn’t actually fall into the second hand, most minds will see the coin fall. The term for this sight projection is sight retention. A normal mind will literally “see” the coin fall. This specific visual hallucination is called a projection, our mind projects its expectation of reality onto our sight. The magician makes note of the triggers that cause these visual breaks from reality and assembles a presentation that often includes a series of these triggers, often strung together through a narrative known as patter. The magician is an actor playing the role of a person with supernatural powers. A person who engineers a magical frame of mind, phantasmagoria, for an audience may or may not be a performer on a stage. If the person who engineered a magical experience is not the actor presenting the feats, they are the puppet-master of the experience, where the magician is a marionette, performing in the puppet-master’s phantasmagorical production. Clock makers of the 17th Century created automatons, mechanical men whose gears and riggings could be activated to perform the tricks of magicians. These clock makers were not magicians; they were the puppet-masters of their metal figurines that could perform magic, even in the absence of their creators. Creating magic requires the recognition of stages within stages, seeing micro-stages within macro-stages. The macro-stage is the physical place the audience encounters the magic. A magician may perform on a traditional proscenium stage, in a parlor, at a dinner table or on a street corner—whatever location the magician interacts with their audience becomes the macro-stage. The micro-stages emerge as the audience shifts their attention. David Copperfield regularly performs coin tricks in front of audiences in excess of 2,000. How? He manages the micro-stages, the focus of his audience. By focusing his own attention, with all his body, on a silver dollar, he can command the attention of 2,000 sets of eyes, whose minds enjoy the representation of a miracle as he makes the coin vanish. Copperfield directs the focus of his audience. Site retention won’t work unless the audience’s mind is engaged. The mind must not only see the cues that trigger the mental projections, but the mind must be so immersed in its focus that the mind accepts the magician’s cues as real. The creation of these cues, the intentional use of projection triggers, is the keystone to invoking illusion. Misdirection is the magician’s ability to secretly do one thing by directing the audience’s attention on something else. Direction is the root of misdirection. Managing the micro-stages of an audiences focus is at the heart of misdirection—movement hides movement. When the puppet-master doesn’t want the audience to see the magician load the dove in a scarf, he choreographs the magician-puppet to “steal” the dove-load during another movement. Sound impossible? Harry Blackstone used to have an elephant walked on stage, up-stage-left, while he commanded attention down-stage-right. When Blackstone gestured up-stage-left, the audience was amazed to suddenly see an elephant. While I cannot fully articulate the magical frame of mind, I can say this: when an audience feels safe, respected and cared for, their minds loosen and the defenses drop. The goal of the puppet master is to have his avatars communicate their love for their audience. Deception created purely for personal gain is a con; deception manifested for the benefit of the audience may feel magical. In years past, puppet-masters were magicians, playwrights, screenwriters and novelists among other artists who created dynamic performances for the theatre-of-the-mind in meat space. The growth of the Internet has borne a new species of puppet-master, the weavers of magic who weave cyberspace into their tapestry, the architects of alternate reality games. May you enjoy and appreciate their creations. |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
Well stated.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
Necromancer Inner circle Chicago 3076 Posts |
Hi Ben,
I like where you're going with this, but I don't think you're following through. You begin by establishing your education in magic, and go on to cursorily discuss some elements of how magicians lead attention and take advantage of perceptional lapses. You then jump to how they respect their audiences. And then suddenly, in your last paragraph, you get to the ARG relevance...and it's not enough. Why do these tools matter to the ARG designer? How does he use them? That's the payoff I read the whole essay to find, but never got. If you decide to rework it, I hope you'll post it here. Best, Neil P.S. Also, read it for spelling. NT
Creator of The Xpert (20 PAGES of reviews!), Cut & Color, Hands-Off Multiple ESP (HOME) System, Rider-Waite Readers book, Zoom Pendulum ebook ...
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
We've gone from "misdirection" to terms like attention leading and attention management. Point them to where you are going. It's only those who seek "proof" or "method" who need misdirection from our mechanics.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Benjamin Garth Mack New user 36 Posts |
Mr. Palmer,
Thank you for your note. Quote:
On 2006-01-31 10:59, Necromancer wrote: Neil, Great points. Very constructive. Thank you!!! You are right...the essay is really incomplete. I never explain or give tactics within ARGs and show how they are exactly similar to a magic show. Strong point that appears obvious to me now but hadn't dawned on me when I was invited to contribute the essay. If any member of this forum is into ARGs and wants to use this as a springboard for their own essay...please help yourself to these words and ideas...this is patter that I openly share with my fellow magicians...I'll quote David Copperfield, "If you're going to steal my routine make it better." Only if I give it away it isn't stealing...now, if you make a commercial endeavor specifically around one of my ideas, that's another construct as well. Magic of the mind is what I'm addressing here, a salute to Herman Hesse and other magicians who didn't have line of sight with his audience but performed beautiful illusions nonetheless. I can hear a magician asking, "Yeah....sure....and rewriting and paraphrasing Fitzkee is supposed to mean.....what?" Well, umm, I didn't know I was paraphrasing Fitzkee...it's been a long while since I read his trilogy and I'm grateful for his ideas and I was trying to evolve those memes and find a current point of reference...a currency we can all exchange. I'm serious...which I know some scoff at...which is just part of being on a stage. My goal with an article, or an essay, or one of my books is to apply what I learned about performing magic on stage to performing magic through memes...the trouble is that I'm not very good yet. Maybe I need to re-read Showmanship For Magicians and I can do a better show. When I was 12, I was a member of the Society of American Magicians Explorer Post 1313 and steward of the Hall of Fame and Magic Museum...philosophy was a heavy part of the initiation...the questions raised related to what made an experience magic. This querry has had a profound affect on me...some may say my findings are trivial...or reveal a chip on my shoulder...or are poorly argued...or would be more accessible if I used a more conventional spelling system--All Of Which are true!!! The explorer post had an entry-level position of Neophyte. That's where I'm at. I'm a Neophyte as magician of magic without props. John Zweers wouldn't allow us to swear and girls weren't allowed to wear slacks on stage...So, I'm accustomed to Magic having its rules. Mr. Zweers failed to instill certain values in me...like the importance of painting the inside of a prop because I would see it when I performed. I'm beginning to appreciate many of the values I heard Mr. Zweers preach. What I found was that I was a businessman. I was selling shows for more money than magicians with far greater hand skills...Mark Matsumato, he was doing a waterfall pass when he was 14...he painted the inside of his props and I respect his integrity...and, he respect my ability to get $500 for a magic show when In 1987, and get repeat bookings at that rate. I knew how to sell myself, but I lacked something. My searching for whatever it is that I'm lacking is a much more public path than most. I rarely disguise myself with avatar's that aren't immediately identifiable as me, Benjamin Garth Siddhartha Mack--my birth name. I'm a magician seeking help from magicians. I'm grateful for your considerations. I'm sorry if our interaction is discomfitting...or, should that be discomfiting...or, am I using a wrong word altogether? I don't know. I know I love magic. I love how magic celebrates and embraces not-knowing...and enjoying not-knowing has something to do with the experience of magic. Wasn't there a German philosopher who talked about the power of "as if"? That treating something as if it were real was the heart of meaning. I imagine so, but my mind is not always acccurate. But magic is the process of treating "as if" seriously. And this magic frame of mind is of interest to me. For although in a certain sense and for light-minded persons, nonexistent things can be more easily and irresponsibly represented in words than existing things, for the serious and conscientious historian it is just the reverse. Nothing is harder, yet nothing is more necessary, than to speak of certain things whose existence is neither demonstrable nor probable. The very fact that serious and conscientious men treat them as existing things, brings them a step closer to existence and to the possibility of being born. --Herman Hesse, Magister Ludi |
|||||||||
cinemagician Inner circle Phila Metro Area 1094 Posts |
Quote:
Creating magic requires the recognition of stages within stages, seeing micro-stages within macro-stages. The macro-stage is the physical place the audience encounters the magic. The above quote is an important point and to the best of my knowledge, seems to be missing (or a least overlooked) by a lot of the books written on magic theory. If an acceptable definition of magic is, "the mental impression of a supernatural agency at work", this mental impression differs greatly when considering the VENUE or circumstance in which the "magical experience" occurs. Furthermore, the CONVICTION (in the spectators mind) of the experience is likely to be prolonged or strenghtened if experienced in a less formal or NON-THEATRICAL setting. Some of the most magical experiences I have ever had took place in this way. When I was a young boy, I was at an arcade somewhere on the New Jersey boardwalk. There was a "house of mirrors" attached to the arcade. A young red-haired boy demonstrated that he could walk through the mirrors and then penetrate a solid wall to one side of the structure. He began to draw a small crowd of youngsters, some of whom were so convinced that they tried it themselves to no avail. The secret was finally revealed to me after the crowd of kids had dispersed. -He had a twin brother. Now, If instead I had been taken to a show to see something similar (say Houdini's walking through a wall) I no doubt would have been impressed, but the suspension of disbelief and the conviction of the illusion (in my mind), even to me as a young boy, would have been a much different experience. Perhaps this helps to explain the wide appeal,(to the masses) of David Blaine. To me a lot of the standard tricks he performed were strengthened by his removal of the "performative aspects" of the tricks thus creating circumstances which as a whole appear to be far more realistic. Indeed there are many macro and micro "stages within stages going" on in his T.V. specials, the last of which is the T.V. itself and the living room in which it resides in. - MW BTW please don't turn this into a "Blaine Thread" just for the record I like Blaine and think he is -at the very least- worth thinking about.
...The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity...
William Butler Yeats |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
How about we check the "stages" and consider them as seperate places?
What's in your mind is yours. What you see is your perceptions. What you hold onto are your beliefs. What you expect is also something you imagine. Lots of places you live inside.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Benjamin Garth Mack New user 36 Posts |
Jonathan, your coaching is supreme. Thank you. I can't compose fast enough and soon I will need to focus on celebrating my birthday and on finishing an application for a Masters program that is due tomorrow. I hope my writing is demonstarting my internalization of your coaching. BTW, Blair Warren is interested in knowing more about your perspectives. Would you be willing to send him an NDA and the piece you sent me? He has a similar perspective, he won't steal your material and there may be an opportunity for the two of you to join forces on a project of his that I think is complimentary.
Cinema, Thank you for your substantive considerations. I loved your description of the fun house experience!!! Fantastic. Phantasmagorical. I'm with you on leaving David Blaine out of this conversation, but then why bring him up? Obviously you see relevance and are hesitant to engage this idea. I imagine it is because of how his name has shaped previous discussions. Here's where I would like to dig in. Quote:
If an acceptable definition of magic is, "the mental impression of a supernatural agency at work", this mental impression differs greatly when considering the VENUE or circumstance in which the "magical experience" occurs. Furthermore, the CONVICTION (in the spectators mind) of the experience is likely to be prolonged or strenghtened if experienced in a less formal or NON-THEATRICAL setting. I'm not on board with the word supernatural. My cosmography holds Nature as supreme, so nothing is Super-natural. However, I STRONGLY AGREE and greatly appreciate your comment: "th[e] mental impression differs greatly when considering the VENUE or circumstance in which the 'magical experience' occurs. Furthermore, the CONVICTION (in the spectators mind) of the experience is likely to be prolonged or strengthened if experienced in a less formal or NON-THEATRICAL setting." and, this relates to ARGs and other performances that I see as creating magic and infusing a magical frame of mind. and, I enjoyed your observation that TV is a stage...just like the screen on which you are reading these words. Perhaps magic has something to do with accepting and relaxing into the notion that reality is beyond our comprehension...and there is value is observing and celebrating how our minds work, especially when we notice something...something peculiar that allows our observation to say I can't believe what I'm seeing and yet isn't this delightful. I hope we can agree that being "tricked" isn't a magical frame of mind. You can raed tihs... It hradly mttaers in waht oredr the ltteers are in a wrod. The olny rlaely iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae, aoccdrnig to rscheearch from Cmabrigde Uinervtisy. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit too mnay porbelms. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig. I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was oevr rtaed! I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. Maybe seeing a beautifully performed illusion reveals a similar notion about our perceptions. And, to the extent we can nurture this frame of mind in our theatrical performances is the extent that we facilitate phantasmagoria. In magical brotherhood, Benjamin Garth |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
When does the "alternate reality" get imbued with sentimental reality?
On a purely objective level, it's just fussing with pixels on the screen and some interaction with the joystick and keyboard...BUT something allows people to emotionally buy into the thing. What aspects of the offered images and context permit this? Since when, after the Donna Reed Show, and Father Knows Best has the living room and it's TV not been a stage for family drama?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Benjamin Garth Mack New user 36 Posts |
Maybe I should have started this thread in the mentalism section. I was intended to discuss the ideas associated with The Trick Brain, but maybe I don't know my audience's relationship to this material and I'm sorry I didn't print a program for this evening's performance but the vast majority of this ideas are held together with extemporaneous connections...and if my spelling isn't within your system I beg you to imagine I have a foreign accent.
Jonathan, there is no alternate reality. This is not a game, this is life, all subjective, all sentimental reality. Magic helps remind me of our subjectivity. A magic show is a gentle reminder to me that everything is not as it seems...causa latet vis est notissima--the cause is hidden the force well known. Life is magic. Nature is magic...magic as a show is the intentional framing of unbelieveable as real...all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Bill Hicks would hug me. If you argue that he wouldn't then...Forgive me. Please. And talk to me about bunnies and chocolate and when we'll all be together. Einstein's relativity does not contradict the notion of Universe except in the way our language can integrate the two. Since many folks equate thoughts with words and can see Truth in words...words become an interesting prop to the mentalist. How many circles are drawn just below this question? O Traditional school teaches you that there is 1 circle. They lied to you. It is impossible to draw one circle. I will prove to you that there are 2 circles. Beware: what I’m about to explain is going to alter the way you see the world forever. If I can’t prove this to you then discard everything I’ve said as being the idle thoughts of a lunatic. If I do prove this to you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, then I want you to read Poker Without Cards. This is going to take some thinking and reflection on your part. Can you hang? Here goes… The geometry you were taught in school is not real. There is no such thing as a 2-dimensional plane. This is a key point that R. Buckminster Fuller said was crippling the minds of the “educated” world. Who is R. Buckminster Fuller? He coined the word “synergy” and held several hundred patents and was revered by businessmen and scientists alike. He is little recognized now because he said we live in a society of systematized brainwashing through misinformation. No, he wasn’t a Scientologist. He wasn’t a hippie. He wasn’t insane. “Bucky” was a Harvard graduate, a Navy officer and he was awarded over 50 honorary doctorates—he was a smart and respected dude. Two-dimensional surfaces do not exist in Nature. They just don’t. In order to exist in Nature an object must exist in space and time. The circle above is not two-dimensional. The circle is on a piece of paper or on a computer screen—BUT it is on something geometry would call three-dimensional. I’m going to ask you to use your imagination to imagine what I’m talking about. This may seem like an insignificant point—most blow off the substantive and far reaching implications of such a simple notion of two-dimensional objects not existing. Bucky held that exerting energy thinking about and believing in non-existent things was a leading contributor to day-to-day anxiety. Buckminster Fuller used to draw a circle on a chalkboard and ask how many circles were there. When people said 1, he would say 2 and that he could prove it. He would then explain how the chalkboard was a solid, so, topographically, it was like a sphere. He then pulled a white ball out of his bag and drew a black circle on this white sphere. Bucky said that any circle was actually two circles because the circle was the division between a microcosm and a macrocosm. Bucky then would fill in the circle and begin to enlarge it. He would stop when the circle reached the equator and covered half the sphere. Then, Bucky would continue and stop when the white ball was almost entirely covered, but there was a small white circle left. He would draw an 8 and ask: "Is an eight-ball a small white circle on a black ball or a white ball with a black circle so large it almost covers the entire ball?" You can’t draw one circle. The nature of circle is a division of two, an inside from an outside. Learning circle the way that we are taught in school blinds us to examining what a circle excludes. Bucky said that the way we learn circle actually cripples the way our mind perceives nature and other human beings…Now, is this magic? Magic helps me reconcile the unknowable and more importantly to reconcile that which I know and is false. It is interesting for me to ponder as to whether Di Di and Xenophon presented themselves as performers or as a god--please, this isn't discussing religion but historical figures in magic--and if you have read this far and are seeking an excuse to pull down this post or request that this thread be removed then I wish you health and better comedy for the years to cum. But, magic isn't going away. The magic moment is when we loose that selfawareness...when we are so invested in the show that we don't care that it isn't real...we relish the moment. My buddy Blair Warren presents an idea I found relevant to the magical state of mind in the form of an experiment. Now, this is Blair's material and if you discuss it outside of this thread we will both be grateful you give him credit, but if you don't like the idea please trust that it is my poor replication and performance herein...you are given a button to press on a small box the next time you go to the movies and instructed that you are to push the button as soon as you are completely absorbed into the movie. How far into the movie would you be before you pressed the button? YOU'LD NEVER PRESS THE BUTTON, because the anticipations of pressing the button would most likely prevent you from relaxing into the experience and the conscious act of pressing the button would pull you out of pressing it even if you forgot about the button. Magic requires an audience like literature requires a reader. The greatest illusion ever performed? The Zeigarnik Effect. I asked Blair Warren to teach me The Zeigarnik Effect. Blair said, “Ben, people will do anything for those who encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions and help them throw rocks at their enemies.” I asked if that was the essence of The Zeigarnik Effect. He said it was the antithesis of The Zeigarnik Effect. That stumped me. I asked what the opposite of people doing anything for those who encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions and help them throw rocks at their enemies. He didn’t answer. “Ben, you should know this. You grew up as a kid magician. What was it like when you bought a magic trick from the magic store?” I told him I had bought a 9-inch silk hanky just last week. “No, Ben. I’m not asking about a prop for magic, I’m talking about buying a magic trick, purchasing a magic trick that had you fooled and you had to buy the trick to learn the secret.” I had to think about that for a while. It had been a long while since I bought a magic trick to learn the secret. Then, it dawned on me. The last magic trick I purchased was The Invisible Deck. Blair asked me about the experience. I told him that the magic store employee had asked me to shuffle an invisible deck of cards and to remove a card and place it up-side-down in the deck. He then pretended to meld the invisible deck with a real deck and my card was up-side-down in his deck. “Ben, what happened after you purchased the trick?” Well, I ripped open the instructions and was extraordinarily disappointed how simple the trick actually was. “Did you ever buy a magic trick and wait, say, a day or two, before reading how the trick was done?” Never. “Why not?” I couldn’t wait. “Why not?” I needed to know how the trick was done. I wanted to be able to do the same trick. I wanted to be amazing. “Was buying the magic trick a form of the magic store encouraging your dreams?” Yes. Is that what the essence of The Zeigarnik Effect, to encourage somebody’s dreams? “No.” What then? “Human nature – even the most extreme examples of persuasion such as suicide cults and mass movements – are based on the most basic of human desires. Just as magicians can perform miracles using mundane principles, powerful persuaders shape the world in much the same way.” Are you saying the world is controlled by secret ultra-powerful magicians? “Ben. You sound paranoid when you talk like that. No, I’m not saying that. I am saying that people who have something to gain will often employ whatever they can to get what they want.” Blair, isn’t that the same thing? “No. Magic implies that there is some supernatural power employed. The Zeigarnik Effect simply exploits the basics of human nature.” The Zeigarnik Effect empathizes with people’s passions, exploiting their dreams and fears and whatever they feel strongly about? “No.” What then? “If you wanted to remember ‘encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions and help them throw rocks at their enemies’ how would you do it?” I’d make a mnemonic. I’d look at the first letter of each phrase and see if I could make a word: encourage, justify, allay, confirm, throw…e, j, a, c and t. ejact. I’d think of ejaculated and that would help me remember ejact and that would help me recall the list. “Well, our mind has many tricks like that. For instance, using the word ‘because’ has been proven to be more persuasive than giving a solid justification that doesn’t use the word because. Our minds are hardwired in certain ways that a professional persuader can exploit.” I asked him if he was going to teach me The Zeigarnick Effect or not. “Ben, I’m trying to prepare you. Like the magic tricks you have paid for in the past, the secret will be disappointing.” Then disappoint me already! Posted: Feb 1, 2006 9:34am --------------------------------------- Mr. Palmer, I enjoyed your recent inquiry. The first place I read about The Zeigranik Effect was in Kurt Vonnegut's Mother Night...albeit a fictional book and the performance of magic in fiction is to be questioned for sure, but _anybody who can't see the value of a book based on lies_ won't see the value of Zeigarnik show anyway. I fear. I board. Me flat. Me no make words go sword. Is this patter? Historically the Zeigarnick is difficult to track down. Some historians argue it was first performed in Galilee. These are silly historians. Like the ones that claim that the Sphinx is only a couple/few thousand years old. Their patter just doesn't match the props... Is a Sucker Die Box a magic experience or more of a trick? This might be mentalism because I may well have lost all semblance of an audience...instead of being a street performer alone on a rainy day, I might as well pack up my stuff because in this attention economy I'm not picking up any coin. Gar. No, please don't see me as gritting my teeth..The anticipatory Greek word gar, meaning “for,” ends one of the greatest performances of The Zeigarnik Effect on record. Where else is gar the final word in a text in all of Greek literature? Nowhere! Fabulously bold! Dramatic. Magic! Now, that's entertainment. Better than seeing the Butterfly Lady recreated, which was sizzling. She vanished into nothingness in mid air...truly awe. Transcendent, if I may use such a word here. And, that's one kup of tea. But let's talk about Kaufman...the PBS magician of media not whomever else. He played with the medium. Now, he liked psychics as friends so that worked for him. But ending a show with Gar is far more impactful than sim sala bim. Doncha think? Click here to view attached image. |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
The Sucker Die Box is a prop.
The prop and routine can be found in Ponsin on Conjuring. Yet nobody opens the box to discover Heisenberg's cat alive and not the least bewildered by its new surroundings. Alternate Reality games are played in realspace? Okay. Have you read the Gaiman Spy story in Miracleman? Always take the third taxi.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
cinemagician Inner circle Phila Metro Area 1094 Posts |
What Ish of Miracle Man Jon?
...The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity...
William Butler Yeats |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Benjamin Garth Mack New user 36 Posts |
JT, googling "gaiman miracleman spy story" yields an error and that site is out of issue 21
you are right about the prop observation... Click here to view attached image. |
|||||||||
Barbielover44 New user 2 Posts |
Hi, I'm a psychology undergraduate and I'm currently looking into the relationship between psychology and magic. I was just wondering if any of you guys could give my any pointers into how much psychology is actually involved in what you do. Anything would be much appreciated! Thanks
|
|||||||||
Benjamin Garth Mack New user 36 Posts |
Fitzkee's Magic by Misdirection is a great place to start...
Jason Alexander's PhD dissertation from UCLA is sometimes available on amazon's used section. The dissertation was published as The Psychology of Deception, if my memory serves me well...but, I'm curious about your inquiry... "How much psychology is actually involved" Other's, including some on this board, have tight essays on the psychology of magic and of a magical frame of mind...but it is difficult for me to imagine a quantification of how much psychology is involved. Is not magic as a performance applied psychology? Is a video demonstrating inattentional blindness magic? I don't know...maybe the performer's intent is part of what makes something magic. And, the amount of formal training or study of psychology varies greatly by magician. I can teach you a trick without explaining one bit of psychology. May I ask you another question? Can you keep a secret? |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-02-01 19:28, Barbielover44 wrote: Good question. There have been some significant discussions on the café about that topic and the posts on those threads cite references in cognitive, physiological and even neurological aspects of psychology as related to vision and perception. There are other threads where social and behavioral issues are addressed. To get a glimmer of how much psychology is involved in magic ( if one wishes to bring in the formal academic language ), consider carefully why and how anyone believes in magic in the first place.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
Cinemagician wrote:
Quote:
If an acceptable definition of magic is, "the mental impression of a supernatural agency at work".... This is an acceptable definition, but it's not the only acceptable definition. Too often we try to limit our words to one definition. This doesn't always work. Benjamin Garth Mack wrote: Quote:
It hradly mttaers in waht oredr the ltteers are in a wrod. The olny rlaely iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae, aoccdrnig to rscheearch from Cmabrigde Uinervtisy. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit too mnay porbelms. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig. I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was oevr rtaed! I didn't buy this as a Cambridge University study the first time I read it almost four years ago. There is no evidence to connect it to Cambridge. It may have come from the University of Edinburgh, but even that is doubtful. Most likely, it is an internet fiction, roughly like the Nieman-Marcus toll house cookie recipe.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Is simpler to cite the article from the journals or ... if truly that old, the public magazine articles if you have to.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Benjamin Garth Mack New user 36 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-02-01 22:05, Bill Palmer wrote: good point! I googled and you appear to be correct: google.com While one can prove many things with Google, even if they are not real, this connection to Cambridge is not one of them...4 years ago, huh...I'm slow to receive some things I find neat. Thank you for your considerations! Ben Posted: Feb 2, 2006 12:41am ----------------------------------------------- Barbielover44, your query made me think of Jung, who's approach to psychology I find interwoven with my take on a magical experience... Forgive me in advance, for being a guest that babbles too much and dominates a conversation, but I'm just sticking to this corner of the café so my voice won't interrupt the other diners. I love the neon signs...makes me feel like I'm sticking to a vinyl seat...but Barbiephile...back to your inquiry...i really don't know what your asking and while you're sipping your coffee...I just ramble a bit more...because I keep thinking about this... http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/titles/691.html "In the threatening situation of the world today, when people are beginning to see that everything is at stake, the projection-creating fantasy soars beyond the realm of earthly organizations and powers into the heavens, into interstellar space, where the rulers of human fate, the gods, once had their abode in the planets.... Even people who would never have thought that a religious problem could be a serious matter that concerned them personally are beginning to ask themselves fundamental questions. Under these circumstances it would not be at all surprising if those sections of the community who ask themselves nothing were visited by `visions,' by a widespread myth seriously believed in by some and rejected as absurd by others."--C. G. Jung, in Flying Saucers Jung's primary concern in Flying Saucers is not with the reality or unreality of UFOs but with their psychic aspect. Rather than speculate about their possible nature and extraterrestrial origin as alleged spacecraft, he asks what it may signify that these phenomena, whether real or imagined, are seen in such numbers just at a time when humankind is menaced as never before in history. The UFOs represent, in Jung's phrase, "a modern myth." which brings me to introducing a guest performer in this Parlor performance. Ladies & Gentlemen...the Sultan of Swing...the Prince of Conch...The rock-star himself, Mr. Mongo Nikol....[the crowd goes wild as Mongo removes his sun glasses] Thank you Ben. [Mongo clears his throat...will he perform a Book With Wings???] No, Ben. I'm going to perform The Zeigarnik Effect. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » The psychology of Magic (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.19 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |