|
|
Go to page 1~2~3~4~5 [Next] | ||||||||||
djurmann Inner circle thinks time to practice and stop writing 1481 Posts |
The snapping of fingers waving of wands (usefulness in hiding the palmed object aside) is something I always feel a certain discomfort with. It could also be because of my discomfort with the snapping of the fingers that I wonder if it detracts from the magic.
Snapping the fingers /waving the wand / sprinkling the wiffle dust etc. The positives (excluding misdirection): 1) It creates a specific point when the magic is imagined to have happened. 2) When performing for children the wand is magic, the snapping the fingers is the moment when the magic happens. The negatives: 1) only a child believes that the wand is magical or that snapping the fingers did anything other than mark a transition point between "I have done something" "now I will show you what I did" The Food for thought: Does it enhance or detract from the magic? If it enhances, how do you make it enhance? If it detracts, what do you do instead? Any ponderings much appreciated. Best wishes, Danny |
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts |
Tyler Erickson has a great phrase for this sort of thing. He calls them "tragic moments".
Magic gestures are dramatizations of the cause behind the effect. If you study your effect more closely, and come up with a really well-defined cause for it, then an appropriate magic gesture can suggest itself. You might even decide you don't need one. The important point is to understand Derren Brown's argument that the cause of the effect can be as compelling (if not more) than the effect itself. One of Tyler's favourite examples for this was looking at a video of a student doing coin-through-pantleg. The guy put the coin in his pocket, snapped his fingers, and then had the coin penetrate the fabric and emerge on the outside. Tyler's breakthrough here was realizing that the finger-snap was unnecessary -- the very action, the slow kneading and effort to work the coin through the pantleg, WAS its own magic moment. All that's needed beyond that point once the coin is out is to show there's no hole in the fabric, and you're done. In something like three card monte, you could snap your fingers to show the card changes position, but it'd be silly. There, it's all about the mix. It might not be a magic trick per se, but it's got a lot of the same things going on, namely deception, a surprising result, and a false cause. You've got to listen to Gazzo talk about how it's done on the street, as it's a real eye-opener. In something like mind-reading, you've got to figure out how that thought is getting from their head into your head. Are you staring deep into their eyes, willing it out of them? Are you touching their temples and looking away, as if trying to weed out the other noisy thoughts in the room? Again, no finger-snap is necessary here. It's been recommended by Tyler (and others) to look at how superheroes approach accomplishing their feats. The Hulk might lift a man effortlessly, but what about a bus? He's got to put his knees into it. Sometimes when Superheroes fly they need to jump into the air, and that means crouching -- it's not always a straight levitation. You've got a superpower that makes a card jump from the middle to the top of the deck. Trivial perhaps, but whatever. How do you do it? Do you need to touch the cards? Do you need to touch the deck? You can bend a coin. How? Do you squeeze it in your hand? Do you stare at it, and it slowly bends? Do you sit on it and press down hard? You can light a match mysteriously. How do you do it? Do you stare at it, and it suddenly bursts into flame? Do you direct heat at it with your hand? Do you snap your fingers? Given the friction involved in a finger-snap, as well as the fact that the instantaneous nature of it offers an aesthetic consistency with the instantaneous lighting of a match, you might have a sustainable claim in that choice for the gesture. These things are all ripe with presentational possibilities -- be it serious or light-hearted -- and offer great opportunities for artistic expression. However, they also serve as an extra misdirectional layer away from the method. And that sustainability is important. If you do a bunch of stuff, and then throw in a token magic gesture that's theatrically unsustainable, you're basically saying by implication that the all that preliminary bunch of stuff you did somehow contains the secret. They might go there anyway, in which case you'll need everything you do to be deceptive, but just as physical misdirection benefits from having a point of importance and interest to misdirect towards (rather than saying "Don't look there!"), a magic gesture that gives them something compelling to ponder over can also benefit the illusion as a whole.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Call me a childish old man but when watching magic I am always ready, willing and able to enter a state of “make believe” and go along with any plausible nonsense the magician dresses up the magic with.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Great stuff, Andrew -- to which I might only add that sometimes a pause or silence can be as effective as an overt action. FOr example, is your hands are in continuous motion, a sleight pause can signal the "magic moment." If the audience is paying close attention you might even hear someone whisper, "I saw it jump over!" The key is not the "event," but the signal that there has been a ripple in the energy force -- or something ;-)
....................................... I do partially agree with Tommy, though -- that weired movements and actions might be part of the character that creates the arena in which magic might happen. Holding a wand can say, "I am a magician" as readily as a poster at the door. The only hting strange is when a magciian uses a wand for only one effect. If it is part of character and showmanship -- why not always? If the most important part of a magic show is the story told afterwards by each spectator, the "obvious cause of the magic" may help couch the telling. I would rather have a grandchild ask, "Do you have a magic wand, Grandpa?" rather than "are you magic, too?"
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
Brad Burt Inner circle 2675 Posts |
What's frequently forgotten in a discussion like this is the 'expectations of the audience'. That fact is that spectators EXPECT a magician to do odd stuff: Wave a wand, snap the fingers, etc. They have no problem at all in imagining that these motions somehow motivate the result in a theatrical sense.
If a magician is doing a 'Gambling Demo' it's not necessary to make 'magical gestures' of any kind. But,if you are making four coins move 'magically' from one hand to the other you 'may' want to do so. By the nature of the thing 'magic' is odd. People in the normal routine of like DO NOT pull coins from the air, make dollar bills float, cut folks in half, etc., etc., etc. That addition of 'gestures' of any kind are just part of the oddness and expected as "what a magician does". In 36 years performing I have never once had someone comment about why I have a wand, snap my fingers, etc. and if it was discordant enough to cause some cognitive dissonance with any audience member someone at some point would have mentioned it, but they don't, because magicians "DO WEIRD STUFF". Now, the question arises: Do magicians HAVE to do weird activating motions or any at all? No necessarily. Some do and some don't, it has to fit the character and personality that you are working within. But, it's not a problem for an audience that is already expecting there to be odd stuff displayed. Best,
Brad Burt
|
|||||||||
Michael Kamen Inner circle Oakland, CA 1315 Posts |
Quote:
The negatives: Very true, but in a way this is the point. The magician offers an impossible explanation (with varying degrees of ludicrousness), with a wink as Whit says. The irony is that at the end, this is seems to be the only "possible" explanation. The adult audience may appreciate being induced to feel like a child, for a moment.
Michael Kamen
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Yes I agree with all of that and or but I think one should not make fun of real magic.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
The snap and the wand are part of the process that makes the magic happen. The problem is that most magicians treat it perfunctorily. Just how loud and how fast and how close to the cards do you have to snap to make it work anyway? What I hate is when the woofle dust is used as a throwaway (unless your character means to make fun of such actions.) If you're going to use the cliche, at least make it real for the moment--that dust must be pretty darn precious!
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
djurmann Inner circle thinks time to practice and stop writing 1481 Posts |
Well yes but I would contend that belief in the snap of the fingers is not the same as inducing wonder or feeling like a child.
Inducing child like (or indeed adult like) wonder is absolutely a goal. But how does woofle dust help achieve this? |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Woofle dust
Each of you – yes, you and you – were children once and again, who found awe and wonder in simple things, but have forgotten to remember. I could tell you stories, more than one, but would rather demonstrate that what you believe to be impossible is but a matter of perception. Magic is an art, you might say – but of the heart and sharing a bit of mystery and enchantment mixed with hope, laughter and fairie dust. Come, gather close …
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
Brad Burt Inner circle 2675 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-07-18 13:32, djurmann wrote: Inducing wonder may or may not be a goal of a magic performance. I can think of any number of goals with just as much weight. But, assuming that it is one goal and maybe your goal it's also true that the use of Woofle Dust may or may not help. The burden of proof swings both ways in this instance. But, there's a bigger problem and it's this: It seems like an awful burden to place on any one particular ancillary part of a magic routine! I mean really it's just Invisible Dust (usually)! It's a particular being given what appears to be the weight of the whole. Magicians do many, many 'small' bits of business that all added together make the full presentation. It seems to be that you could ask: "How does the use of Woofle Dust, etc. ADD to the overall effectiveness of THIS PARTICULAR routine? Now, we have a legitimate focus which is no longer abstract. Again, I can think of any number of 'small' reasons to go to a pocket for Woofle Dust not the least being the dumping or stealing of something and not necessarily from the pocket itself. Hand 'A' goes to pocket while hand 'B' makes the steal. Best,
Brad Burt
|
|||||||||
djurmann Inner circle thinks time to practice and stop writing 1481 Posts |
Well true, but then the dust is more to do with misdirection than adding to the entertainment of itself. Actually I think the dust idea may be superior to the snap of the fingers (for me - and only as a suggestion) because one can play with it as a concept, for me it has a more childlike quality than a snap.
"I will sprinkle a little woofle dust, not too much, not too little - what's that? too much" whereas a snap of the fingers is absolute - it has happened or it hasn't. I also take your point that the question to ask is what does it add to a routine. I have an ACR in mind when discussing this. I am still not sure that it adds much. "I sprinkle the dust and it seeps slowly through the pack until it finds your card and there the card dematerialises and is brought by the woofle dust back to the top." is for my personality superior to "I snap my fingers and look it's at the top" but I can't help but wonder if a more logical reason would be better still. Or to quote Andrew "If you study your effect more closely, and come up with a really well-defined cause for it". |
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts |
We have a really long tradition of the tongue-in-cheek tone in magic, longer than many think. There are some older books where people think the patter is out of date, but if delivered with irony some of those lines can be just as funny now as they were then.
Woofle dust is silly, and while I lack the performance footage to back me up, I have to think that it's always been meant to be silly. Silly is neither good nor bad. It's an artistic choice. A silly car chase and a serious, intense car chase can both offer positive experiences to an audience. One thing to consider with the Ambitious Card is that a snap is a large claim to make, and potentially unsustainable, until you come around to the pop-up card climax. At that point, you're holding the deck, you do NOTHING, and then the top card pops up. The fact that you do nothing, and because they can see the exact moment that the magic happens, actually gives the fingersnap some credibility. The logic might not be there, but the co-relation between the two, combined with the absence of any other possible explanation, can make the gesture sustainable.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts |
||||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts |
Whit,
Did you experiment with various magic gestures before settling on that one?
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts |
Oh, yes. I tried the "Cast a shadow" and finger snap and other things. This one had to best impact. I think the attitude is so important, the tongue in cheekiness of the magician, but the seriousness of the character in what he says. His claim is made with all seriousness, but knowing no one will believe him. Like grandpa telling a tall tale, and know none of the kids believe it. He will still end seriously: "And that's how I escaped from the tiger!"
|
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts |
Offhand, did you ever manage to nail down a theory as to why your gesture had more impact than the others?
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Well I guess it is kinda scientifical and like connected to the teleporter thing.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Michael Kamen Inner circle Oakland, CA 1315 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-07-18 13:32, djurmann wrote: I think it is a mistake to think in terms of "belief in the snap of the fingers or in woofle dust." It is not about inducing their belief in anything other than the parameters of the experiment underway, the illusion you are creating. Where is the card? In the middle of the deck. Big fat illusion and, yes, to be believed. A child of a certain age will accept the explanation given as factual, however wonderful. Where did the money under the pillow come from? Why the tooth fairy dear. A well constructed and performed magic trick leaves the adult with no better explanation, and a feeling that I would characterize as part vulnerability (fear, flight, fight), and part incredulity, i.e., astonishment or wonder. In the right mix and with the right cushioning, this is very funny indeed.
Michael Kamen
|
|||||||||
KungFuMagic Regular user 167 Posts |
One thing to consider in the psychology of the magic is that the "magic" is a sort of ephemeral . . . squishy thing. In watching an effect, we and laymen all know that magic will happen. We watch lots of things go on, and magic sparks somewhere, and then we see the results. The use of a wand, or dust, or snap or whatever gives the mind something to anchor to. It connects the visual and auditory parts of the brain to the effect happening. It gives the chance to pull more impact by involving more brain centers . . . instead of them being bored and wandering off.
Even more crucial is that it snaps the not-conscious/unconscious/sub-conscious portion of our awareness into focus on that one moment in the space time continuum as we tell it that the magic happened right THERE. It creates a powerful and useful misdirection for those people who have a faint wondering if something had happened, or maybe they saw something, then . . . POW. We bring the entire mind into focus here and now to convince that the magic happened at that moment. Sure, it ain't gonna fool the guy who saw you stick both whole raccoons into a giant secret pocket in the leg of your trousers . . . . but it will strengthen the conviction we are trying to make, will provide an anchor for the naive mind to see where they were to focus. (not on that raccoon dancing in your trousers.
Nick Sasso
part-time Samurai conjurer |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » "and when I snap my fingers..." (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2~3~4~5 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.07 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 < |