|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10~11 [Next] | ||||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21245 Posts |
Let me say Glenn has a point.
Too much production value is bad. Yep gotta agree there. HE even implied that many use it as a crutch. And if I am right that he meant this I agree also. It can be as harmfull as too little production. Gotta agree there. Now to say it is MUMBO JUMBO is completly reckless. To point to the misuse of a technique and say it is a bad technique is just irresponsible and unfair. To wach someone execute a bad "palm" and then say the technique is MUMBO JUMBO, well you get the point. The point really is that PROPER "theatrical training" (see so we don't get confused with the building alone) will teach you when you are using too much, or too little. THAT IS THE POINT!!! But if all you do is dismiss it out of hand, and say I don't bother because all I do is local shows so the heck with my audiences, you will never learn that. I have my opinions and no matter what I am right for me and I don't care how much sense anyone makes I am sticking to it. Not really an environment in which one can expect a lot of growth as a performer now is it? Glenn you have a habit of using the "extremes" to prove your point. Usually the truth lies somewhere in the middle of an arguement. As I said you are right on some points, but to use them to dismiss the theatrical element of magic is again not really on beam. Yes indeed we learn from our audiences. BUT how do we know what we are trying to learn? How can we keep booking a BAD show? How can we find enough willing audiences to sit through nonsense till we happen to come across the answer? You seem to say that if we just do it enough it will occur to us. Trust me I have seen enough BAD acts to know that this is not the truth. How do you know what to change? Do you see what I am getting at? It is like trying to figure out an Algabraic equasion without knowing how to even ADD! You may come across the answer by luck, but certianly it is tough to argue that it would be easier if you knew how to add.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
bishthemagish Inner circle 6013 Posts |
My opinion is to little theater is just as bad. But people today seem to want to talk about when there is not enough theater in a show. And I agree that not enough theater in a show is not good. But it is not talked about that much when there is to much theater and that is just as bad.
Over production and over scripting and to many or small routines to cover to many large full stage routines can drag the show down. I think that balance in a show is important to think about. If your asking me Danny what is the answer the answer is that I do not know. My judge is the audience. Thurston used to do what his staff called school sessions. That is that they would set up the show and do it in front of a small audience and a few show people that took notes. Then according to the notes they could make changes. Ed Sullivan did this to before the show went live. That is the show had a run through in full costume before the live broadcast. Several old time vaudeville managers took notes and then Ed made the necessary changes. The notes could be - this first act is to long. The second act was to short. The third act the juggler needs to press his vest. The fourth act needs to speak up more. And that kept the show tight. Sometimes they had to move the acts around just because of set up problems. The had to strike a full loin cage on several shows over the years. Thurston got the same kind of notes. So and so illusion needs touch up. This side illusion blocks you Thurston when it is wheeled out from stage right. A lot of people don’t know that Cardini did a talking act for years and Vernon, Benson and a few others watched his act and said for him to do it to music. Cardini fought this. He liked his act but he did not become the act that made him famous until he left out the talking. (To much theater or to many notes?) Just a few thoughts.
Glenn Bishop Cardician
Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16543 Posts |
Allow me to quote a magician Danny, who makes your point, with respect, a little more clearly than you, even though he is dead. God rest is soul. I trust this might help make your point clear even if some do not agree with it. Anyway this might, I hope, help if you allow sometime for it to be read and understood. We should remember that the purpose speaking is the not the transmission but the reception.
“Now, artistic judgment may, to a great extent, be gained by study and experience. Similarly, physical adaptation may be developed by early and systematic training. And the acquisition of either of those essentials may be considerably facilitated by means of accurate knowledge. Such knowledge may be either theoretical or practical; but of the, two the theoretical must, in the long run, prove to be the more valuable. It necessarily conducts the student to the bedrock of his subject; whereas the study of practical details only leads to a knowledge of isolated facts. By means of the latter form of study, the student may learn what to do in order to produce certain effects. But, however much attention he may devote to the acquisition of that detailed knowledge, he will never ascertain there from the reasons which underlie the processes he employs. He will only learn the "how" of his work; the "why" will remain obscure. In short, he will never really understand his business. Everything he does will be done blindly. Every new departure he endeavors to make must be subject to conclusions arrived at by means of "trial and error." Any little variation upon his usual practice will represent a subject of extreme doubt. He can only think that what he proposes to do will produce the result he desires. He can never know what he is doing, because he does not understand why the things he does are successful. On the other hand, the man who has gained a knowledge of the broad principles which constitute the foundation of the art side of magic must necessarily possess a great advantage, in such circumstances. He knows the reason why each effect he has already produced has been successful. He can follow the manner in which each of his previous devices has operated, in influencing the minds of spectators. Similarly, from his knowledge of basic principles, he will be able to deduce the proper manner of presentation and the probable effect of any new conception. The same principles which govern what he has already done also govern what he is about to do. Therefore, being acquainted with the "why" of the matter, he is not afflicted by doubts concerning the "how." Putting the whole thing in a nutshell, it simply comes to this-the man not only knows his business; he also understands it. He knows the technique, and understands the art. As to the great value - and the commercial value - of the understanding, we think, there can exist no possible doubt.” - Nevil Maskelyne -
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21245 Posts |
Tommy you reference a great point.
Yes it does say it in a nicer way than I do. It is far more diplomatic than what I wrote, if not for that it is almost exactly what I wrote. The purpose of speaking is indeed being recieved, but you need a willing recipient. I hope that the people I and others were worried about do indeed read your reference. It is on point and even if it is by a dead guy, seems to speak through the ages.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
George Ledo Magic Café Columnist SF Bay Area 3042 Posts |
Ummmmm... I'm not sure I want to step into this hornet's nest... but, at the risk of finding myself getting shot from all sides...
Oh, what the heck, sometimes I CAN be a glutton for punishment! ...I'm going to try to clarify something Glenn said a few posts back, where he listed several things which he believed constituted "too much theater." First, I agree that what you listed, Glenn, are distractions -- and the way you described them, they're bad. I've seen this stuff too, and most of the time it's 'way out of context with the show. It's like watching a guy deliver a beautiful, long, perfectly aimed throw from left field to second base during a football game. But, given that what I do for a living is theater, I have to disagree with the term "too much theater." Most of these distractions are not theater as such: they're more like spectacle for the sake of spectacle. They're show techniques used with no real reasoning behind them, no motivation, and no conception of where they fit into the show. I've gone into this theater thing several times in my column, to try to clarify what the term means, and to explain how -- once we understand what theater is -- we can choose to make our magic theatrical or not. Just like we can choose to make it art or not. Entertainment can be either art or theater or both, but it really doesn't have to be either one as long as it entertains. With that, I'll go have dinner.
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here" |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21245 Posts |
WEll I think the debate was not what theater is.
It was more when it is called MUMBO JUMBO that things got a bit muddy. Great definitions George. I too agreed with Glenn on those points. Now to the bone of contention which you never tried to address. Is the "just have fun, take some props off the shelf and start making money" really the best thing to teach the new ones? Wouldn't many magicians benifit from the simple knowlege that "theater training" can offer? Either to tell them to take things out, or to add things in. Nobody was in disagreement as to what "theater" was or is. It was if it would help or was necessary that was the "hornets nest" as you put it.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
George Ledo Magic Café Columnist SF Bay Area 3042 Posts |
Okay, I'm back from dinner. Pizza and a bottle of wine. Yum!
No, I don't buy that "just have fun, take some props off the shelf and start making money" is the best thing to teach the newbies. That's just a way of saying magic is a mercenary activity, and it misses the point. However, I would tend to agree with something along the lines of "just have fun, take some props off the shelf and create some magic with them." The props are not the point; the illusion of creating magic is. And that's where I believe a lot of newbies miss the boat. Now, if you can make some money by creating magic, hey, more power to you. As far as theater training, yes, I do believe it would help a lot of people who want to perform magic. But -- and it's a big but -- I believe that only those who really want to create magic would benefit from it. Those who just want to blow the socks off their friends with a pre-packaged trick wouldn't get anything out of theater training: they'd just think it's a boring inconvenience. I'm going to be addressing this in a future column, but I've seen the same thing happen for a long time with set designers who are not professionally trained. It's very common for a newbie to get a book on set design, skip the first part (which is about the whole idea and theory of set design), and go right to the part on how to build scenery. Sure, it's more fun and the words are shorter. So, when they do get to create a set, they don't design a set: they just design scenery. It's two totally different things. But we see it all the time. And it's really sad, because a bunch of scenery (flats, platforms, steps, ramps, loose-pin hinges, and so on) doesn't have anything to do with the story being presented.
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here" |
|||||||||
Michael Baker Eternal Order Near a river in the Midwest 11172 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-04-18 23:00, Dannydoyle wrote: Perhaps their show might benefit, but they would not necessarily... unless they understood WHY these things were to be done. Now... to punch this entire thread in the gut... I am a firm believer in the Peter Principle. I believe that people ultimately rise to their level of incompetence. How does this relate to this discussion? I have seen people in the position of teachers of art, theatrical directors and other sorts of "creative arts" experts that didn't know their ass from a sandbag. Sure, they may have had much formal training, but they didn't have enough God-given sense to do anything really good with it. This results in something worse than the blind leading the blind. It sets a standard. Things become "things" because very few people have the guts to do anything except be fusible with the common standard... regardless of what level it is on. Stupidity with enough endurance eventually gets its name on the door, too. Now granted, not all people in the positions of expert status are incompetent. But it stands to reason that a chain of command is only as good as its weakest link. Should this be someone in a position of expert status, the entire chain is made weaker by the incompetent teaching, guiding, and leading. To tie this into this thread further, "too much theater" seems to be alluding to the fact that the tools and techniques of the theater are being oft times, misused. BIG SURPRISE THERE!!! Not everyone has the competency to use the tools and techniques of the theater to the best result. Not every magician can effectively use every tool and technique available to them. Take the best crayons in the box, and most people will not be able to produce anything very good with them. However, one person out of a thousand, or perhaps a million could take the ugliest crayons and produce something extraordinary. But would everyone be able to appreciate it? Would it have the qualities that appeal to everyone, or many of them, or just some of them, or none of them? Interpretation becomes the ultimate consumer. The use of the tools and techniques of the theater are available to anyone wishing to use them. Some people will use them badly, causing some others to assume they are all useless. Others will use them profoundly, causing some people to become zealots for the use of them. Neither extreme is wholey deserved. ~michael
~michael baker
The Magic Company |
|||||||||
johnnymystic Inner circle North Adams Ma. 1576 Posts |
Well said Michael!!!
I myself learned a lot of this magic and performing stuff on my own...trial and error, no formal training. So far it has been 22 years and finally I'm getting the hang of it all. I will say this there were a lot of bad shows people had to sit thru. johnny
I drink cheap tequila and vomit
<BR>I cannot eat hot wings...acid reflux <BR>I never inhale <BR>I can put a field dress on a deer |
|||||||||
JackScratch Inner circle 2151 Posts |
I think what Glenn means by "Too much theatre" is "Bad theatre". There is a very clear difference. In fact, "Bad theatre" is more often a product of "too little theatre" than "too much theatre".
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16543 Posts |
The word ‘theory’ derives from the Greek ‘theorein’, which means ‘to look at’. According to some sources, it was used frequently in terms of ‘looking at’ a theatre stage, which may explain why sometimes the word ‘theory’ is used as something provisional or not completely resembling real. The term ‘theoria’ (a noun) was already used by the scholars of ancient Greece.
Obvious I am no scholar. However; To my mind “Theatre and “Theory” are so intricately linked that they can not be separated. If no theatre is in your magic there is no theory in it. In other words no art will be in the magic if you take out the theatre. A stage or a close up mat is a theatre it is just matter of scale. The close up table is a little theatre. As a card guy to me the cards are little actors and I am sort of puppet master who pulls the strings. It does not have be a Punch and Judy show, which this place reminds of at times. I have noted with card tricks that you can put a number of then together: Rather than do them one after the other, combine them to make routines. A simple example is to do say four pick a card tricks but have the four guys each choose one each at the start. You still need to work out which would be the order but least they are connected in that way. I think the order of effects is not too hard to work out, what is harder, I find, is working out how to connect the tricks so the whole thing is one so to speak.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
[quote]On 2006-04-19 00:19, Michael Baker wrote:
Quote:
On 2006-04-18 23:00, Dannydoyle wrote: Me too, I'm afraid, Michael. |
|||||||||
cinemagician Inner circle Phila Metro Area 1094 Posts |
[quote]On 2006-04-18 11:08, The One wrote:
Another thing you seem to have misunderstood Glenn... is that nobody was suggesting that you had to take theater lesson in order to perform. Even thought I plan to, I haven't taken any lesson myself. However I have read about it (magic and showmanship, absolute magic etc.) and I'm constantly thinking about the theatrics of my magic. Magic and Showmanship is perhaps the best source available for ideas concerning routining structure. I was going to open a discussion on it, but this area of the Café, has gotten too nasty lately. What percentage of this thread actaully has anything to do with the topic of routining structure? It seems that all this nastyness is contagious, or is creating a strange kind of gestault. Some people have some good things to say here and there but it's hard to hear them through all of the noise.
...The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity...
William Butler Yeats |
|||||||||
George Ledo Magic Café Columnist SF Bay Area 3042 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-04-19 00:19, Michael Baker wrote: Well said, Michael! I see the Peter Principle at work in fields outside of magic every day. Missing the forest for the trees. Sometimes I think it's become the Dilbert Principle. As far as misusing theatrical techniques due to lack of knowledge or lack of common sense, yep, it happens all the time. I mention, in my column on spectacle, a couple of instances where I did this many years ago, and, to this day, I want to slide under the table when I think of it. What the audience saw was a gaudy backdrop that had nothing to do with the show, and lighting that made me look like the Frankenstein monster. But hey, I saw the techniques in a book and said, wow, that's really cool, I'm going to use them.
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here" |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-04-16 12:54, DaiBato wrote:....Is there any method to the madness?... Great question. Look into the basics of rhetoric and public speaking. There is a book How to Speak; How to Listen which offers a good overview of this subject. When one has the tools, one can then ask the pertinant question: When the show is over, what sentiments would the performer like the audience to take with them and of them which would the performer prefer the audience members to communicate to others? Made plain for the facile: 1) What draws the audience to attend? 2) What keeps their interest while attending? 3) When they leave, what will show or they tell others?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21245 Posts |
The problem with nasty is this.
Someone makes a statement of what seems to be absolte fact. Such as refering to the theater stuff as MUMBO JUMBO. People who have spent their LIFE usning these principals, then get their fur up and take offense at the fipllant remark to how they have gotten to where they are in life, and feel others can help. Knowing the history of "theater" in general and being able to follow it and help themselvs and perhaps others. So then when it is pointed out, the first one gets their fur up and says something concecending back and that causes the second to reespond and before you know it others have jumped in on each side. The side with less people get defensive and grasp at straws and just keep going. Then add in the history from other threads and you have a donnybrook! So having been in the middle of the fray let me take the heat out of it for a second. My point at least seems to converge pretty close with what Tommy quoted and what George has been putting up. Others as well. If you use trial and error, well it takes a LOT longer than having someone help you. Try finding a spacific address without a map. In my opinion this is close to what you are doing. Actually you are looking for SEVERAL houses. I do think it will help most acts but not the PERSON as was mentioned above. I also am in COMPLETE agreement with the Peter PRincipal. I watched him give a speech. It is in EVERY aspect of life not only business. Perhaps what we are seeing in action here Michael, is a real time chart of the Peter Principal. We all have risen to our level and will stay there. Our beliefs are grounded in our surroundnigs.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
bishthemagish Inner circle 6013 Posts |
Michael Baker great post - I am with you. George Ledo Great posting - I’m with you to. It is easy to see that both of you HAVE the experience And the know how and have been DOING magic for a long time. Tommy has also added a lot of great information to this thread.
Danny understands because he is a pro and has experience. But like many others get hug up and have a problem with my slang and the way I say somethings. My slang and they way I box up information to store it in my subconscious mind. There was a big to-do when I said theater was mumbo jumbo. And that is my own slang for talking about something that I view as something that is often tools for entertainment. The same theater is used in church service - there it is not mumbo jumbo but there is theater. Many church stages are the best equipped theater stages in the world today. Theater is also used in the political arena and there is also very serious. I am a big fan of Orson Wells and read a lot of books about him. He started off in life in a cart in the UK with a donkey and a box of paint and canvas and went off into the countryside to paint. After painting and giving painting away for food he ran out of paint and canvas and was very hungry. He had theater training and then he went to a theater and knocked on the door to get a job. Later he went on to form the Mercury theater group in New York city. The "War of the worlds" script came for the radio show. Then he went into movies. Orson used to say when he was doing a movie he was still trying to make art with that old box of paint and the canvas that he used when he started out. The tools were different - and the art was movies and a different sound stage than the theater stage as well. Orson's view point is that whatever you add to the basic story is theater, In painting it is often a story on the canvas, in a theater it is a story on the stage, in the movies it is a story on the screen. A good entertainment starts with a story and then to tell the story we use theater depending on the venue to enhance the story. Now my slang for whatever is added to the story is the theater and I often use the word mumbo jumbo because I look at art and the way stuck up people look at art as to be very funny. Because the art world is full of art people that have their nose up in the air and have this attitude like the way they understand art is "the way" and that makes them special. I grew up calling magic tricks. When I joined my first magic club I was told by some snotty members that "We don't like calling them tricks - there EFFECTS". To the lay audience they are often called "Jokes" and "Games" and I have been doing restaurants for years and had a person say to me I love little jokes do another one. It is funny that often people can get hung up and not like the way a person talks or uses slang, and funny how we can get hung up on words and not like words so much that we refuse or don't understand the meaning of what is written. Please do not take that as a slam because I have dyslexia and I write with a 2 grade writing ability. By the way the word mumbo jumbo and it's relationship to theater I said it to my Dad in a conversation about an over produced show we were watching and he laughed. Over the years I have heard his friends use it and it became a slang term to his group of friends when there is to much added to a story or a plot of a magic show or a script. And in my opinion to much mumbo jumbo happens ALL THE TIME in magic and ALL THE TIME in theater and ALL THE TIME in show business. And I do not expect anyone to agree with me. And the words mumbo jumbo as to adding theater to tell a story came from one of my drama and theater teacher's Mr. Tucker!
Glenn Bishop Cardician
Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs |
|||||||||
JackScratch Inner circle 2151 Posts |
Glenn, that's the thing. Even if you didn't mean to put down theatre, what you wrote reads like you did. That may not be the worst of all crimes, but these forums are where people come to learn. Even if what you believe doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, I personaly can't just allow a statement that looks like you are suggesting that theatrics and preparation are not only unceeded, but actualy detramental, to just stand. Particularly when you back it up with credentials like experience. You are lagitimizing the many bad practices that are going on out there. You are contributing to bad performances.
I do not take it personaly that you don't feel these things are important. I do, however take it personaly that you might be spreading that concept. As I keep saying, "It may be possible to make an entertaining show without theatrics and proper preparation. It is not, however efficient, responsible, or professional do do so." To suggest otherwise is to do great harm to our particular art. |
|||||||||
The One Veteran user 325 Posts |
The problem with this thread is that Glenn suggested something first... then others (without refering to Glenn's suggestion) suggested something else... then Glenn suggested that everything else besides what he mentioned, was MUMBO JUMBO.
Glenn, after your original post you should've stopped posting. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Here's MY opinion (it might be a little harsh). I once mentioned to David Blaine that I performed the linking rings. He looked at me and he said "drop it"... The biggest problem with magic today is caused by exactly what Glenn is suggesting. Modern audiences don't connect with magic as much as they once did because of all the performers over the past century who have just "done it". Without thinking about it. Because of that, what was once a modern effect that emotionally hooked and disturbed an audience (i.e. miser's dream), is only now "a trick." Magicians who examine what works and WHY it works will realize that, in the past, a miser's dream could simply be done without any presentation or build up and it would apply to the audience. That is no longer the case. Of course it is still being done by performers who simply "do it" (sometimes for 40 years}. (Glenn, I also found that to be the problem with your "11 minute act" forum. The clip seemed like a bunch of tricks (or as many call them: "classics of magic")grabbed off a shelf an performed in an entertaining manner. No offense, but it is my belief that any clown with sleight of hand skills could do that. Apparently others thought the same thing also, because after watching the clip and reading your arrogant style of writing found that there was not much to learn from you.) Now I don't think that classics don't have a place in magic... but if I were to perform something that has been past down for centuries to me, I would give it its space in my show (and not simply say "here's a classic of magic"). I would build it up, tell it's history, and maybe then, perform it. That would no longer make it "just a trick". Of course, the proccess Of thinking about if I should (character) and how to present a classic of magic (script), is theater. It's not Mumbo jumbo. So in order to routine an act, don't just do it. Think about who you are, what you want your magic to look and feel like, and why you're doin it. And work from there. The One
I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end...
I came here... To tell you how this is going to begin. |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16543 Posts |
You put up your act and we will play the part of the critic.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » How to routine an act? » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10~11 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.11 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 < |