I have recently been thinking a lot more about the presentation of a trick and how the audience sees it rather than the method. Far too often it is easy for a magician to get caught up in the workings of a trick, eg. how awkard it is to set up, can it be performed surrounded, do I finish clean, etc. There is a concept in computer programming called data abstraction, where the complicated detail of how the program works is hidden from the user, and so like a good programmer, a good magician must hide all the implementation details of the trick and ensure that his audience sees only the effect. This is his art, the hiding of the implementation. As we all know, once the audience can see how a trick is done, even the best looking illusion is reduced to the reaction of, "Ohh, that's how it works, that's clever." When what we really want is, "Wow that's cool, how did you do that?" I think we are all guilty of opening up a new trick and going, "Oh that's too obvious a method!" or "Oh the old TT vanishing method, how boring." Or just generally being disappointed with the workings of a trick or what you have to do to present it. The old time great magicians are probably turning in their graves (now that would be a cool illusion!) at how fussy modern mages have become in regards to self working tricks or tricks that fit with our preconceptions that manufacturers should know all of our working conditions, likes and dislikes and then cater their products exactly to them.
Now I too have been guilty of getting tricks and thinking, man I've been ripped off, but on the other hand I have also gotten 'dud' tricks and thought "I could use this in another way, or maybe if I replaced this part with a paperclip (in my Macyver moments), it would work twice as well." The point is if we get a trick, we should use more of our imagination in creating something special for the audience, rather than dismissing it and hopping onto the magic Café to complain about it. Let me know what you think.
NB: I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this discussion, but wasn't sure where else to put it, so if a mod could move it to a more appropriate place if necessary.

I always try to make something special, even out of the most simple trick....

Magixx

Harlequin-

My themed show is Classics of Magic.

The reason they are classics is it means they are audience tested & work as well as entertain, as long as performers we add our own touch to each effect then the fun in presenting your method to an audience that reacts to this is very gratifying!

Many times Ive seen effects performed by others that have the audience in Hysterics or totally entertained

Because I cant perform like that performer!-I will never do the effect as well so I don't do them

We must add our own touches & as magicians some are very fussy as you mention!

I read somewhere recently that -If you are paid to perform-audience reaction & entertainment are all that matters!!!

You make a good point ABM about performing tricks that are suited to our individual style, and I'm not implying we should force ourselves to do tricks that don't suit our performing style at all. I'm more getting at making the most out of tricks, even if they don't meet our initial expectations of them when we open the box and read the instructions.

My pet peeve, and yes I've been guilty of it too, is dismissing an item too quickly without thinking about the potential it could have for an audience.

Details about seting up (ie. getting into a trick), finishing clean (ie. getting out of a trick) and performing surrounded (performance venue) all play a vital part in the presentation of an effect. You have to sweat the details in order to make sure that an effect flows properly and fits into your act. In fact, it is attention to these details that will gradually open your mind to how you can make the effect better.

IMHO, not enough attention is focused on details such as this. I've seen too many performers showing simply trick after trick, with no theme or continuity to their presentation. In short, there is no REASON behind what they are doing.

You may have heard an old adage in magic that "Every action must be motivated". Well, if that is true, shouldn't every trick be motivated as well? Now, assuming that you have a very solid presentation of the effect that is motivated and meaningful, the method does not matter.

If you have properly constructed the presenation of the effect, the method will become entirely secondary to the entertainment at hand. Indeed, some of the strongest effects out there (when presented properly) use the simplest methods.

845, I think you just proved the point -- some, like you, overthink. ONE theory says that every action needs to be motivated. On the other extreme is the David Blaine approach of "Hey, lookit. I wanna show you somethin"

Which is correct? Who knows ... but EVERY trick doesn't need to have a "reason." Sometimes, the reason is you're a magician, and you're just going to do something cool.

The point?
Whose point?
Is there an argument?

Do YOU know the distinctions between "right", "correct" and "true"?

Learning to read is cool.

The point, Jonathan, was method vs. presentation and whether or not a magician can "overthink" the effect. Can YOU read?

Whose point? The general point of discussion.

Is there an argument? I don't think so ... but it sounds a little like you want to start one for some reason.

Do I know the difference between words? Yes. And, if you check a thesaurus, you'll find they can be synonymous.

Yes, learning to read is cool.

So ... what's YOUR point?

1) the words are not synonyms as they relate to different subjects, objects and contexts. Such is why we have dictionaries.

2) the point of the original question... eludes me still. The presuppositions and presumptions as stated beg far too many questions to offer a concise response.

Yes, reading is fundamental. A good skill I encourage folks to learn. Grammar and rhetoric skills for writing are also useful, and may serve us well after basic reading skills progress beyond mere identification of common phrases.

To the original poster on this thread; have a look at your post and pick a few of those propositions so we can discuss.

Most of the folks I've met who perform regularly have compartmentalized their concerns for prop-traffic management and presentation issues. The few times I've heard anyone worry about traffic, they were gratified to find servantes and tables and the possibility of changing jackets in mid-act... not to mention assistants and costume changes between acts.

I've left discussion of how ad-copy has made a strange market of our craft. How many items are not suitable for general use or for use around the general public who still like to look at the props. Not so picky here as tired of reading strange ad copy for tricks that describe not what a lay audience perceives but how a magician (author/secret knower )would like fool another magician. Magic tricks are not just puzzles.


Posted: Jan 19, 2005 11:26am
---------------------------------------


If I've correctly extracted your thesis from the rest of your post;
-----I agree entirely and don't even consider performing a piece until I find a way to communicate the magic TO the audience.
-----IMHO the magic exists only for the audience and at that, only with their permission.
Else
-----Just annoying them with puzzles, daring them to figure out the tricks.
Otherwise? /* is there an otherwise? */
Endif

:)

I didn't realize each and every post was going to be placed under a grammatical microscope. I always figured the free flow of ideas trumped word-for-word analysis.

My original post or thesis (I was at work when I was writing it and my thinking at the time may have been a bit abstract ), was basically intended to spark a discussion about whatever anyone wanted to take out of it. I think I started writing it after I had read some negative reviews around here of tricks and wanted to try and think creatively and imaginatively about tricks (even if we consider them bad) rather than trash them.
And magicman845, the detail a performer puts into a trick is what makes it his/hers and if it sounded like I was downplaying the importance of planned detail in performance, I am sorry, as that is definitely not what I think.
Anyway thanks all for your interesting points!