En·ter·tain·ment   [en-ter-teyn-muhnt]
noun
1.
the act of entertaining; agreeable occupation for the mind; diversion; amusement: Solving the daily crossword puzzle is an entertainment for many.
2.
something affording pleasure, diversion, or amusement, especially a performance of some kind: The highlight of the ball was an elaborate entertainment.
3.
hospitable provision for the needs and wants of guests.
4.
a divertingly adventurous, comic, or picaresque novel.


I read in another forum about someone saying the problem with "wannabee" magicians is that their goal is to slay or fry their audiences & that they know nothing about entertaining people.

I went to a friends house today & did some magic for his girlfriend & her daughter,they both freaked out.

I fried them,slayed them,dazzled them,made them laugh,scared them a bit,& by the time I left,they both were convinced I had special powers.

I guess I could have done a simple card trick & simply "entertained" them,but why would I not want to twist my spectators heads around?

I think it's the difference between someone saying that's nice & someone grabbing your arm & looking you in the eyes & saying there's no way anyone could do what you just did.

I work with a lot of other magicians & I have never heard anyone in the back room saying,I sure did entertain them(although they did).They talk about how they killed,fried,took their heads off,etc.


All my rambling aside,what kind of reactions do you want to get out of your spectators?
Do you simply want to entertain them or something more?


Thanks,
Mike

I'd rather be entertaining.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWImtgLU28s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbWzDFPZbYI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VCUQ3wOBog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx85OGLjxWY

Nothing wrong with frying, slaying or twisting people's heads around. It's just not my thing.

For somebody who doesn't care about frying, slaying or twisting people's heads around, you use some pretty sophisticated and deceptive strategies from time to time, Payne.

I do see your point Payne,but I would say your not like the average magician




Mike

Why does it have to be one or the other? I want to fry them in an entertaining way!

Jim

Yes. Sometimes it is both. I think the issue is when one becomes the focus, to the exclusion of the other. It matters not if the magician's tone is playing up, or more reserved. Is the audience mystified by the magic, AND are they enjoying the experience at the same time? As an audience member, if I am investing time to watch a "magician", I want both.

I've seen magicians that were highly entertaining, but their magic was somewhat transparent. On the other hand, I've seen some others that blew my socks off, but were also somewhat annoying, or left me not caring.

Further, it is not a matter of finding a happy medium. It's a matter of turning up the level of both factors.

I want to start a whole new religion with churches, statues and big books you can take into the bathroom and contemplate the meaning of life with.
If that is not going to happen, you can buy me a happy meal at McDonalds.

I want to really 'kill' says magician "A", while magician "B" says he really wants to entertain! The hilarity of this is that frequently when you watch a "B" type magician they are so boring you want to thrust a wand up your nose in order to obtain a self inflicted lobotomy! And, these are the guys that are FREQUENTLY told by 'friends' in the 'biz' how great they are, thus helping in the poor guys delusion.

On the other hand the guy who thinks in terms of being the "A" type will frequently be about as entertaining as it gets. They combine what matters to them most, i.e., great, killer effects, superb technique, etc., but in fact they are unbeknownst to themselves quite excellent entertainers also.

The optimum would logically be a combination of both. GREAT magic, combined with excellent 'entertainment' skills. That would be an 'entertaining magician.' What hinders becoming a great entertainer of any kind?

Part of the problem is a problem of psychology. The problem of deceiving ones self about just 'how good' an entertainer/magician one is. In my experience the vast majority of folks in magic cannot accept even the concept of getting/receiving the most positive forms of critical analysis, much less if it is negative in any way. This almost precludes them from getting better, although some do anyway it is rare. It's been pointed out that in 'comedy' you don't have this problem. You are good? The other folks in your field will crush you ego and all. You have the stones to get beyond that? You 'might' make it. Magic is too fraternal, too pathological, too nice for the most part for this to happen. At least right now. Who wants to be the 'bad' guy and crush the magical dreams of a guy who evidences no talent for the craft whatsoever??? I don't!

The amount of 'ego pathology' in all forms of the entertainment fields is stunning. This was brought home to me recently when I sent an email to one of the biggest names in magic. A man I consider easily one of the finest magical entertainers of all time. I was effusive in my positive feedback for his work.....except I asked a question that only had to do with a 'variant' on one of his routines I had purchased! All I wondered was whether he had tried this other idea in the evolution of what is a brilliant routine. His reaction in return was ... hmmm....how do I put this....defensive, irritated and insulted. But, I had not even offered anything close to being critical. At all!

I had my wife the Dr. of Psychology read it and she looked confused. "If this irritated him...he's got a problem."

Here, I'll tell you how to tell if you are interested in really being entertaining or not. I came up with this years ago to advantage students I had at the time. Here it is: Do YOU watch your audience EVERY SINGLE show for the smallest sign that you are not delivering? Do you watch your audience for clues as to what is working and not working and most importantly are you willing to change in response to what you learn from listening to your audience??? If you don't/are not then you don't care about being entertaining or becoming a better entertainer. You can have all the outside help in the world, from critical friends and 'directors' and all that other stuff which I applaud, but in the end....if you don't/can't listen to what your audience tells you positively/negatively then you don't really care about getting better. You'll just go on in a self-imposed haze of mediocrity.

Listening closely to your audience is the metaphorical way of learning how to allocate properly your 'entertainment' capital. It tells you where to change, but not how. Further listening tells you where you got it right and where you need to do more work. It's a royal pain in the 'back of the lap'. If it was easy everyone would be doing it. But, it's not. For reasons stated above. Here you are doing the hard work, the work that challenges us as entertainers at our emotional core, with regards to Alfred, Lord Tennyson:

Half a league, half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
"Forward, the Light Brigade!
"Charge for the guns!" he said:
Into the valley of Death

Sincerest regards,
Rode the six hundred.

Two words: Tommy Wonder.

Strong magic does not need much presentation. But holding an audience from one strong trick to another requires entertainment and charm.

There are few venues that pay money that allow you to come and do one mind blanking magic trick and leave. They want you to do two hours of walkaround, or a thirty minute standup show. Audiences are easily distracted and easily wander off if the performer does not know how to engage, direct and amuse them between the "killer effects." It is getting them through the necessary exposition and buildup of each new presentation that becomes difficult.

I have always been under the impression that it is good to fight with neither hand held behind one's back.

There's no percentage in being average.

Mike

not like ascertainment? or ascertain-ment? http://ascertain-ment.com/ascertainment%20htmls/

dictionary - where to learn what words mean rather than how to pronouce them - presuming one already knows how to spell them?

a dictionary - whichever tells you what you though you were right about knowing?

newspeak - the correct dictionary - all others are doubleplus ungood.

I recall Al Schneider's words (close), "My job is to astonish spectators. Whether or not they are entertained is up to them."

Today's audience often does not seek "entertainment" but desires to "be entertained," and what any spectator takes away from your performance may have little to do with the quality, number or mystery of your magic effects. The true test is "what story will they tell to grandchildren."

I just watched Jeff McBride perform for a smallish audience of about 120 people -- many being magicians. Less than a third of his time on stage was performing magic effects, and only a couple of those could pass Whit's "Strong magic" test; but there was not a moment that was not "entertaining." The secret was that the audience was "with him" every moment and he adapted his performance to the setting, energy and needs of this particular audience. The "magic" is/was that the result was greater than the component parts -- with every spectator able to say, "yes, we were magic that night."

It did not hurt that this was a fund raiser for Ricky Boone's "Vanishing Wheelchair" project. Every person in the audience autographed a book for Ricky gifted by Jeff. I doubt that Jeff has any concerns over whether he "fried" or "mystified" or even "entertained" -- only that he is glad that he stopped in Asheville, NC one Tuesday night.

In Our Magic it explains the idea of balance nicely in the chapter called speed in presentation.

Very much like reading Lewis Carroll.....

“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?”
― Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass

Where Carroll meant to amuse...

Learning to read between the lines often comes much later than learning to look up words, their etymology and homonyms/homophones.

Presentation can be used to build up the fun as well as to build up the effect as well as to hide the secret method. The functions are not one and the same, but niether are they mutually exclusive.

You need to grow a beard and change your public name to some word in Sanskrit.