|
|
EsnRedshirt Special user Newark, CA 895 Posts |
Audience psychology question: If "Magician's Hazard" is an illusion where the magician is the one subjected to "danger" (Death Drop, milkcan escape, etc.), and "Assistant's Hazard" is an illusion where the assistant is subjected to perceived danger (sawing-in-half, Temple of Bernares, etc.), which do you prefer, and why?
I'm aware there are definate reasons for one or the other, apart from presentation and style- from the audience's perspective, there's more reason for the magician to be in an "escape-gone-wrong" type of illusion, and some illusions just require an assistant to be used (because the magician's too big!) However, if you've got a choice between, say, a Twister modified to be self-working, and the standard Twister illusion, which would you use? Which tends to get better audience reactions? Why (for both questions)?
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.
* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt. |
Dennis Michael Inner circle Southern, NJ 5821 Posts |
The biggest problem with Self vs Assistant is the loss of the assistant.
The twister for example is built for an assistant, then the assistant quits, leaves, or whatever, then you are stuck for the pressing moment. In an illusion like disembodied princess then the gimmick need to be rebuilt. If self, the problem doesn't exist.
Dennis Michael
|
EsnRedshirt Special user Newark, CA 895 Posts |
DenDowhy, this is true- and happened to me. One week before a show, my primary assistant developed bronchitus, which caused her chest pain when she got into some of the positions required for my illusions. I was fortunate to have a stage hand who, though slightly taller, was also more slender than my principle assistant, and fit into the boxes just as well. I was lucky not to have any illusions which required person-specific gimmicks. (I think the big illusionists like Copperfield have multiple gimmicks in case of assistant's absence.)
I have seen the version of disembodied where the illusionist is the "victim". I, personally, don't find it as interesting as the assistant version, but that just may be one of my quirks. For one, it's too mechanical for my tastes. I'll also admit to a gender bias- I'd rather be looking at a cute girl strapped in a box than a guy. But I'm asking because I'm trying to overcome my own bias when designing my illusions. So- which does the audience seem to prefer? Or does it even matter, as long as the routine is performed well?
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.
* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt. |
Dennis Michael Inner circle Southern, NJ 5821 Posts |
I too thought it was nice to have a female assistant for the box tricks, however, having seen others do the "self-Illusion" and tie it with an assistant doing more than just moving the box, I've grown to like it both ways.
Tie illuions together into one, where it works, in such a way, you not "holding the emptybag" if an assistant quits leaves, is sick, or injured, is seems to be a good idea.
Dennis Michael
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Grand illusion » » Magician's Hazard vs. Assistant's Hazard? (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.01 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 < |