I love this thread, and agree with Teller, Pop and the majority. And I'm a little nonplussed over the emotional responses of funsway and WitchDocChris. Especially funsway. Kill magic? Apologize to the magic community? Really???

I don't see this as a goal myself. If nobody is interested in how it is done, claiming you fooled or amazed them is a dubious proposition.

Personally I want them wondering how it was done because the alternative is not great. Maybe they don't care. Ouch maybe they weren't fooled. Ouch. Maybe both. Double ouch. And perhaps they were just so entertained tip to tail that don't want to know ever. Hmmm doubtful.

I think you can keep them in the moment and entertained and pass the time flawlessly while they are there. Once they are gone they do what they will. No matter how entertained they were, on Google tomorrow afternoon you can't keep that going. It is what it is.

Just the word "magic" seems to imply the game is afoot. It has implications in the same way "picnic" implies food. Denying it is pointless.

Focusing on entertainment value is how I chose to preform. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I agree with you overall.

It's MAGIC. They have just seen something that they know is utterly impossible, right before their eyes. It's impossible, it can't be true, and yet despite everything they know about the universe, there it is, happening as they watch. I'd say that if they DON'T wonder how that impossibility came to pass, you either did a terrible job or they have lost all semblance of human thought.

Then again, to paraphrase Max Maven, some magicians have the ability to turn the inherently profound into the trivial. Ho, hum.

Exactly.

Maybe we do both: try to figure it out AND suspend belief. Just at different times. Joshua Jay wrote an article in the last issue of Magic, which referenced a College of New Jersey study on people's (non magicians) reactions to magic. While people try to figure things out (only 14% said they did not want to figure it out), 40% of the respondents thought some magic was "real", and another 16% thought that mindreading was 'absolutely possible'. When I first saw Dai Vernon's slow motion vanish, I thought "did he do it this way?", and then later said to myself "NO, I don't want to know. It just looks to beautiful to spoil! I'll let the mystery be." Lynn

Both are exactly what they do because the magic and entertainment are opposites. Where the magic is factual the entertainment is fictional. It is these two opposites which create the dilemma at the climax. The facts of the magic apparently prove the fictional story they have gone along with is true. The term Our Magic is not one but two words. Simply performing magic is not Our Magic. We are not charlatans or miracle workers and the like. That which makes it Our Magic that which distinguishes Our Magic from other magic is the fiction they have gone along with contained in the entrainment. It is that fictional side of it which makes it an art, an amusement as opposed to a religion or a science.

The best part about this thread is magicians trying to portray they view performances for just the shear beauty and nothing else. Puhleeze. Magicians might make the conscious decision to not seek the method during a performance because they are confident they can figure it out later. Magicians always want to know how something is done. You'd be a lazy magician if you didn't. Magicians can NEVER watch a magic show like laypeople. Just as producers and directors can't watch movies the way regular people do. You now know how much of this is done, so you watch for other stuff. Make no mistake, Pop is right and so are the rest when they say people want who don't want to know aren't really interested. All laypeople want to know how it's done because they have no idea how it's done. Give them a clue and they lose interest. Part of them is hoping for a really cool reason too. If you tell someone that it's just a piece of string that fooled them they get ****ed. Real astonishment is always followed by 'how could that be', which leads to 'how is it done?'

The audience member may not say 'I'm dying to know how it's done', but they are. If they're really interested anyway.

I think you're partly right, Hermit, that magicians indeed DO want to figure out how things are done. However, I think you're missing Tommy's dialectical ("opposites") point that we can BOTH suspend our belief AND want to know how it's done. In some cases, I want to suspend belief for a long time. I REALLY want to know how something is done, if I figure I might be able to perform it myself. (Indeed, it's what makes some of us purchase magic beyond our wallets). As for lay people, I was kind of astonished to read in Joshua Jay's article that 14% of people in a survey did NOT want to figure out how a magic trick is done; but you could also read that to say 14% don't care about magic at all! Then again, those people would be missing out on some beauty, and what it properly called the "art" of astonishment. Lynn

I think all magicians do that to the extent they can. Most people don't like magic, so I think the 14% could care less. All magic is a challenge in one way or another. Even if the challenge is to prove I have abilities you don't.

"Most people don't like magic"

Blimey .....is that true? If it is then I should give up.

Since this thread is continuing, I will offer some explanation about my earlier post. Anyone who has read my post for the past decade on the Café knows that my statements were uncharacteristic, impossible for me, astonishing or amazing. This was deliberate as a form of hyperbole! The theme of several posters is that when a person is confronted with something astonishing, amazing or seemingly impossible - they immediately "try and figure it out." Look what happened here. The responses were all emotional and no one attempted to "find out what happened." No queries as to what I meant or if I was ill. No exploration of the several ideas I presented. Just emotional reactions.

Is this equivalent to what occurs during/after a magic effect? Make your own judgement. What is demonstrated is that no one can state what occurs in another person's mind when confronted with astonishment or "awe and wonder." We can evaluate their later response or rationalization, but cannot place any high degree of reliability on that "adaptive memory." Suppose a number of people observe a short magic show after a nice dinner. Everyone found cause to offer an utterance of amazement, shock or astonishment. Everyone applauded. We can surmise they were entertained. Later, the hostess, the performer and a research psychologist all talk to the observers. I will suggest that what is told to each of these queries does not accurately reflect what was felt by the observer or indicate what mental processes were involved. They might well tell each questioner what they imagine that person wants to hear. They may even be embarrassed to reveal their actually thinking or reaction.

Consider -- one observer knows the performer is a good magician from previous experience. They long ago gave up trying to "figure it out" as this does not provide any endorphin reward in their orbital cortex. Instead, they get a reward for predicting they will be astonished and are proved correct. A second observer played with magic tricks as s kid and believe they already know how everything is done. They have no motivation to "figure it out," especially if they should be proved wrong. A third observer is secretly recording the event and plan to search them on YouTube in order to discover the secrets. They not only are not trying to "figure it out" at the moment of occurrence, but will lie about what transpired when asked.

Yes, folks might "wonder how that impossibility came to pass" as suggested by danaruns, but that is far different for a universal claim that everyone "ties to figure it out" as an immediate response. Regardless, thanks to those posters who demonstrated that astonishment does not automatically result in a rational deliberation - and those, who in silence, possibly just want entertainment with no mental taxation at all.

A recent scientific article equated "magic" with "having a secret." If one knows the secret then the demonstration is science or mechanics and not magic. Thus, one might conclude that any desire to discover the secret (or reveal it) will kill the magic. As noted by many great performers such as Whit - the objective is to insure that no explanation is possible. That fact that some observers know this (or appreciate it) and do not treat an observed effect by a known magician as a puzzle to be solved, does not mean they do not like magic or revel in the experience. I feel they experientially may just appreciate the rewards of being astonished more than those derived from solving a puzzle.

I do apologize to any who felt angst over my little experiment. I felt some consternation over there not being a single member contacting me to discover the cause of my "impossible post." I will write that off to the vagaries/artificiality of Internet communications. In my 73 years I have never found anyone who "does not like magic." - but many who do not like tricks. Big difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_projection_fallacy

There are several routines out there that I do NOT want to know how they are done. This isn't laziness - it's purely that I want to have some things that I can see and feel that magical, wondrous feeling. Mostly they are completely out of my style of performance, too, so knowing wouldn't do me any good. I get much more value from experiencing the unknown than I would if someone blurted out the method. Magicians - you all want to prove you know everything. I don't know everything, and I like that.

I recently had a friend start renting a room from us. She actually gets angry if someone tells her how a magic trick is done. She doesn't want to know. She actively does not want to know, she just wants to watch it and feel amazed and enjoy that feeling.

So stop projecting yourself onto everyone.

So how is an opinion projecting? or are you the one projecting.

To me, it's always a good starting point. All magicians must overcome all the bad magic people have seen. I assume I need to do something that is above the norm to ensure that I can get their attention. I think people like good magic. Unfortunately, it is often not plentiful.

But you know there is a method. And, that method is probably something very simple. My point is that as a magician, you may enjoy a performance for it's beauty, but you can never experience it as a layperson. The wondrous magical feeling is underlain by knowledge of performance methods.

As to projection, have a simple disagreement with people. Stop you armchair psychologist bit. Looking up something on wikipedia to try and void an opinion is small minded.

That is quite the emotional reaction.

You gave an absolute statement, not an opinion. That "magicians always want to know". That's projecting your own "always want to know" mentality onto everyone else. I disproved that statement, because I am a magician and I do not want to know. Therefore, magicians do not "always want to know". That's the problem with absolute statements, they fall apart with the smallest evidence to the contrary.

I also disproved the sentiment that laymen "Always want to know", because my roommate is a laymen and she adamantly doesn't want to know.

Knowing that there is a method is not the same as wanting to know what said method is. You're moving the goal posts there.

I know there's a deception going on when I see certain performances. I do not try to figure them out, because knowing how it's done would probably be less enjoyable/valuable than watching it and having no idea. I like being mystified. It happens rarely enough that I really do try to hang on to it when it does happen.

The only opinion you expressed is that any magician that doesn't want to know the methods is lazy. You are entitled to that opinion. I do, however, invite you to consider this: If a routine is beautiful, and is a style that you would never perform, the value of enjoying the performance at face value is higher than the value of knowing a secret you will never use.

As to my "armchair psychologist bit": that's not psychology it's logic. That is how I "have a simple disagreement". It's not a bit, this is what debate is. One person presents their case, another person, or multiple people, presents theirs. Usually those cases will disagree with each other. Then they discuss the individual points, presenting data and using logic to draw conclusions.

You're mad that I presented a solid argument against your case. I have presented data that goes against your previously held belief. I invite you to consider that data and do with it what you please.

But to dismiss me because my statements are contrary to your beliefs is the actual small minded thing happening here.

There seems to be some equivocation here. How can there be "bad magic?" Bad choice of trick. Bad performance. Choices inappropriate for a specific audience -- all these will lead to a result other than desired, to create astonishment that leads to a "no possible solution so magic is the only option," or "inexplicable phenomenon' that I won't explore further.

If that does not occur, then it was not "magic" or even "pretend magic." Now, if you want "magic" to apply to anything from cleaning products to "butt dialing" a phone, then the world is filled with bad magic -- not the concern of performers or art. There are many ways to get attention before one starts in on a magic effect including "don't." Certainly, a performer might start off with a simpler effect to insure full attention before doing "good stuff," but that is not "bad magic. I do agree that many performances fail to meet the standard of "looks like magic" and can still be entertaining. What does the observer expect? If they do not expect magic to occur it will not - and that is sad rather than bad.

I think you have a valid point in there somewhere, " - just good routining. But feeling that you have to "overcome' anything seems a futile approach.

Magic: