|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 | ||||||||||
Michael Kamen Inner circle Oakland, CA 1315 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-01-16 12:31, bishthemagish wrote: As usual Glen, I cannot find fault with anything you have said. While not all the words you use have clear meaning to me, most do, and I am certain the rest have meaning for you. The issues I am struggling with do not appear to be issues you, a professional performer, can easily relate to or need to consider. In that I take my hat off to you, wish you well, and hope sincerely I have the opportunity to meet you and catch your act some time. Posted: Jan 17, 2007 12:26am -------------------------------------------- Quote:
On 2007-01-16 16:45, SpellbinderEntertainment wrote: Walt, It is clear to me that we are talking past one another, in good faith though without doubt. The words we are each using, we are using in our own ways -- I am the most guilty of that because it is pretty clear that you do not share many of my meanings. Some months ago, Whit Haydn graced this forum with a lengthy dialectic in which he attempted to establish definitions and a frame of reference for the sake of his discussion. He took it quite a distance, 27 pages worth, much of it repetition of his central ideas, before the thing abruptly ended. He was hindered in this forum by a number of bright, articulate, and I am sure well-meaning people insisting on using their own frame of reference instead of the one he was proposing. Why should they surrender to Whit Haydn's frame of reference anyway? I for one felt the frame of reference makes a great deal of sense, and am looking forward to reading more from Mr. Haydn. He has defined magic quite apart from other art forms in a way that so far looks quite viable to me. With some of those ideas added to our common language, I think these things would be easier to discuss. My opinion of course. Enough about me. I have never seen your act (I hope one day to correct that deficit), but I appreciate and respect your words and your approach. I have visited your website and understand you use storytelling as an important part of your work. I have also considered that storytelling is an important model for presentation of magic, in all the ways of revealing meaning that you mention. I love magic in its many forms and styles. We may disagree on whether the style is the magic, or the magic is found within the style -- but we are all magicians here, and entitled to whatever ideas inspire us. Best wishes to you, Michael Posted: Jan 17, 2007 12:39am -------------------------------------------- Quote:
On 2007-01-16 13:30, karbonkid wrote: My apologies. I have been attempting to use what is clearly an unfamiliar approach in my terminology, and probably doing so poorly and inconsistently anyway. In answer to your question, no, I am not saying anything of the kind. I deeply respect a good comic, magician or combination of the two. I am not familiar with David Williamson, so this gives me something more to look forward to based on your recommendation. Best wishes.
Michael Kamen
|
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Gotta train those doggerels to pull the sled of meaning in one direction.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts |
I use humor in my magic quite a bit. But the most powerful effects often are presented without humor.
Vernon hated magicians who told a lot of irrelevant "jokes" that distracted from the plots of the tricks. He felt the humor should be minimal and always directly related to the presentation of the effect. He admired many humorous magicians, and definitely was not against magic being combined with humor at all. The fun and humor should be "born of magic." It is easy for a performer to lesson the impact of a trick by treating it in a light and humorous way, which weakens the sense of importance with which a weighty illusion should be presented. But it is also important to remember that in a twenty minute or more performance, one powerhouse trick after another without humorous relief can be tiring and cause "brain hurt." A professional entertainer often uses humor to help ease this feeling of brain strain, and the uncomfortable feeling of cognitive dissonance that the most powerful magic tricks engender. We have to make it okay to be stuck on the dilemma "There is no such thing as magic/There is no other explanation possible." This is where story-telling, acting, comedy and other theatrical techniques come in. They are needed to frame the experience in a way that is pleasant and comfortable for the audience. Theater is the "cape" that hides the "sword" of the dilemma. I am not a big fan of story magic. It can be done well, but it is the most difficult of all ways to present magic. It demands that you not only be a great story teller--one that people would hire whether he did magic or not--and a great magician, it also demands a deep understanding of the nature of magic. If you think booking magic is difficult, try booking story-telling--it is a tough sell in the modern market. Maskelyne and Devant spend a great deal of thought on the topic of the relationship between theater (story-telling) and magic, and it is the most important stuff in "Our Magic," I believe. Another problem I have with combining magic with story-telling is that often the story is the point of the exercise, and the magic is either used as eye-candy or allegory to support the story, or as some sort of "proof" that the story is true. In both cases, magic is "subservient" to the story. It is simply a transitional device or a special effect. I am a purest in that sense. I believe that the meaning of a magic trick should be discovered within the trick itself, and not added on top of the trick like so much ketchup. Finally, story magic has to allow for the magician to go in and out of the theatrical frame in order to make the magic happen "in real time" instead of in "once upon a time." Stories are so powerful, that they engender "suspension of disbelief"--something that is totally deadly to the experience of magic. Instead of the immediate sense of being a "witness" to something remarkable, stories are filed in the brain in a different way. The spectator is held at a distance from the effect itself. It often seems the spectator is being "told" about magic that happened to someone else, at another time. "Suspension of disbelief" in the character of the performer is essential. "Suspension of disbelief" with regard to the presentation of the argument of the trick itself is deadly to magic. |
|||||||||
DStachowiak Inner circle Baltimore, MD 2158 Posts |
Thanks, Whit, you've given me a lot to think about.
Woke up.
Fell out of bed. Dragged a comb across m' head. |
|||||||||
bishthemagish Inner circle 6013 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-01-16 16:45, SpellbinderEntertainment wrote: Magic can work with a story but it doesn’t necessarily need a story. Most magicians have done some very artistic acts with nothing more than being a magician on the stage and then doing miracles. From what I have seen of Jack Gwynne’s act it was an act of - magician takes the stage - miracles happen, then light comedy patter and miracles continue. I think that magic can happen without a story of nothing more than a strong happening of magic. Like the production of a bowling ball from a briefcase. It doesn’t make any sense but it is not suppose to. In a square circle or a production box a great illusion is to look like you produce more things out of the box that can fit in the box. What to produce? A full dinner including a table cloth for a scripted number like the Wizards supper or a Christmas tree with trimmings and then Santa for a Holiday show or anything you want to. As long as the surprise of the productions is mystifying and a happening of magic almost anything works. The point I would like to try to make is that every magician seems to have there own way of doing things. Some tell jokes, Some don't. Some do magic to music and some are conversational performers. The only yard stick that seems to work as a measurement of success is that if the audience likes them or not. Quote:
Michael Kamen said. Thanks Michael, may I add a few more thoughts. My Job as a magician and a hypnotist and as an entertainer is to entertain the audience that I am engaged to entertain. It is not to prove that magic is real. It is not to prove hypnotism is real. It is not to prove gravity is real. It is to entertain the audience to the best of my ability at that agreed upon time. Art is not the goal. Entertainment is the goal but if the entertainment is performed with class and the magician does his or her homework. And if they get the experience by doing shows over time. Often art or becoming the performing artist happens over time and almost by magic. At least that is my opinion having watched a lot of magicians that I have known over a long time growing up in magic and show business. And I am still growing! Just a few more thoughts.
Glenn Bishop Cardician
Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs |
|||||||||
evolve629 Inner circle A stack of 3838 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-01-17 13:50, bishthemagish wrote: In Eugene Burger's words "the primary metaphor of magic is transformation and more importantly, will we become the magicians in our own lives?" Very poignant indeed.
One hundred percent of the shots you don't take don't go in - Wayne Gretzky
My favorite part is putting the gaffs in the spectators hands...it gives you that warm fuzzy feeling inside! - Bob Kohler |
|||||||||
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts |
What do you suppose that means, evolve629?
I personally don't believe it is true. I don't think that that meaning is brought out of the trick itself. I think it is a meaning that is tacked on to the trick by the magician. How do the spectators becoming the magicians in their own lives work? How do you get from the sponge rabbits to that kind of empowerment? I think Eugene is kidding himself--I don't believe spectators find magic empowering in that way. I think that line of thought could lead to "magical thinking" which is one of the most infantile, misleading, and dangerous ways of looking at the world. "Magical Thinking" is really only for children, drunks, and the mentally ill. |
|||||||||
evolve629 Inner circle A stack of 3838 Posts |
I think Eugene Burger's trying to make a point and espouse a way of thinking that's inherently positive. Most of us grow up believing and learning that we need to change - loose weight, stop drinking / smoking, earn more money, etc. As a magician, magic don't just happen with our sleight of hands and props, we can assume responsiblity of our own life to make our own life more magical and no more "poor me." Validation such as before a show "I give myself permission to be powerful" is a technique and not mere magical thinking.
All of us indulge in magical thinking at one time or another. All you have to do is buy a lottery ticket and you are in the midst of magical thinking, notes Eugene.
One hundred percent of the shots you don't take don't go in - Wayne Gretzky
My favorite part is putting the gaffs in the spectators hands...it gives you that warm fuzzy feeling inside! - Bob Kohler |
|||||||||
Whit Haydn V.I.P. 5449 Posts |
Thinking positively may be important, and it is true that we all do sometimes drift into childish magical thinking.
But is that a good thing? Should people really be encouraged to think that the world will bend to their will alone? Magical Thinking and Positive Thinking are not the same thing. Magical Thinking is when we believe that just wanting something bad enough--willing it to happen hard enough--will make it happen. What does magic have to do with the power of positive thinking? Are you saying that because someone can make a card rise out of a deck, without apparent cause, that proves we can do the impossible (making the card rise without any actual measurable cause) if we only believe we can? Isn't this very misleading? I am always surprised when some magician says magic proves that anything is possible. That simply isn't true. Believing that man can fly, and then looking for a way to make that happen is progress and technology. It is important to think positively and keep looking for the science and technolgy needed and not give up. Without hope, faith and positive thinking, there would be no such progress. Believing that man can find a way to make it look like he is flying without material cause, and then finding a way to do that is either fraud or magic depending on the purpose of the practitioner. The performance of magic itself proves nothing but that there is always a danger of fraud when dealing with other people. Nevertheless, I believe magic tricks are full of meaning and importance. But that has to be discovered within each trick itself, not slopped onto it like so much ketchup. Magical Thinking is not the same as inductive or creative reasoning, which is a process of evaluating a series of "what ifs" and trying to see how they might fit the known facts. Magical Thinking is basically just wishful thinking. I don't think it should be encouraged in adults, and I am not sure it is helpful to kids except to help them through their time of dependence by giving them false security. We are always deliberately lying to our spectators. We tell them that the effect they are actually or apparently witnessing is created by a cause that they themselves know could not be the cause. Magical Thinking is like the feather that the mouse gave to Dumbo the elephant. It helped give him the "faith" to believe that he could really fly. That faith in real life would be silly. No matter how much a young elephant believes he could fly, he still is never going to fly. Faith in the surprising expanse of the possible is different from having faith in something that actually is impossible. If you believe that faith in the ability of the will "alone" to overcome the laws of nature is a good and healthy thing, I can't argue with you. But it strikes me as a kind of lunacy. When magicians start believing and justifying their own lies, they are drifting out of art and into childish make-believe. The result to me would seem to keep magic locked in the silly and immature presentations that most adults have a hard time taking seriously. I think bad philosophy is not a good thing to foist on the public. |
|||||||||
David Parr V.I.P. 898 Posts |
This thread has been effectively derailed, so I suppose my responding to the recent turn of topic can’t derail it any further. I know that nothing I type here will change the mind of some individuals, but I hope that young people and beginners in magic will read the following message and understand that the views recently expressed in this thread are not held by all magicians and should not be accepted without question. I’ll begin by addressing the misinterpretation of Eugene Burger’s words:
Eugene referred to the underlying theme of transformation in magic as a “metaphor,” and he did that for a reason. His intention was not to imply that audience members at a magic show take the themes of magic literally, as in “You know what? I could probably produce balls and coins at my fingertips if I wish intently enough! In fact, I could probably make a sandwich using only my thoughts. I’m gonna go home and try that!” What Eugene was suggesting is that all magic carries with it an underlying theme of hope for change -- that what seems daunting and impossible can sometimes be achievable. To see this in action on a small scale, I have read interviews with athletes in which they spoke of utterly transforming themselves physically and the firmly directed inner vision required to do it. On a large scale, the Civil Rights Movement of the ’60s was the result of people envisioning a different society and working to transform it. The “I Have a Dream” speech is, at its heart, an expression of wishful thinking. Eugene was pointing out that magic, like any performing art, contains themes and metaphors and symbols. These can be on the surface and readily apparent or they can be under the surface. The metaphor that we can all be magicians is not meant to imply that we can all start blinking our eyes and twitching our noses to cause object to appear and disappear. It implies that our imaginations make all of us capable of transforming ourselves and our lives, and sometimes even the world around us, by envisioning a change and then acting to bring it about. Even the most staunchly literal-minded magicians and so-called skeptics acknowledge that part of what made Houdini a superstar was the theme or metaphor of freedom that was central to his performances. The image of overcoming restrictions against all odds was very powerful to people seeking to transform their lives by, say, leaving their home countries. So, is magical thinking by definition childish and dangerous? No, it is not. The fact is, anything can be dangerous. Drinking too much water can be dangerous. The individual who characterized magical thinking as being infantile and dangerous probably does not hold a degree in clinical psychology. Neither do I, but I have read enough in this area to understand the psychological differences between grown-ups and children. Adults can be conscious of their magical thinking. They can understand it, control it and direct it; children cannot. Is it possible for magical thinking to be directed in a healthy and productive way? Why not? Our states of mind can affect our physical states of being. Studies have shown that the act of smiling can reduce one’s blood pressure, and that the nervous systems of actors pretending to be frightened or elated actually respond as if they were experiencing those emotions. It has been said that a significant portion of medical history is the history of the placebo effect. Thinking that the sugar pill works makes it work to some extent. Hypnosis has been dismissed by some as magical thinking, but others have quit smoking or overeating or other unhealthy behaviors through hypnosis. Practically any human behavior can be childish or unhealthy. To condemn “wishful thinking” as infantile, sick and deranged is to reject with it practically every productive act of human imagination. And one needn’t bother inveighing against the harmful effects of human imagination: When the time comes, I’m sure our robot overlords will do their best to stamp it out. |
|||||||||
Michael Kamen Inner circle Oakland, CA 1315 Posts |
I agree with both Mr. Parr and Mr. Haydn. I think Mr. Parr read into Mr. Haydn's post by suggesting that by "wishful thinking" Mr. Haydn was referring to an athlete visualizing making a successful shot, dive, sprint, or whatever. There is something we describe as wishful thinking, and many magical effects can cheaply become an easy metaphor for those.
I also would be very surprised if Mr. Haydn considered as magical thinking, the popular appeal of Houdini, i.e., as a source of inspiration around freedom and overcoming limitations. Here the obvious metaphor is with something perfectly possible, as taught by Dr. King and as is being demonstrated by millions of Americans today. I think both gentlemen have made profoundly important points. Mr. Parr's points have all been made before. Mr. Haydn's should have been said long ago. Just my opinion.
Michael Kamen
|
|||||||||
evolve629 Inner circle A stack of 3838 Posts |
Not only Houdini but also David Blaine's "dream manifesto" where our minds have no limits.
One hundred percent of the shots you don't take don't go in - Wayne Gretzky
My favorite part is putting the gaffs in the spectators hands...it gives you that warm fuzzy feeling inside! - Bob Kohler |
|||||||||
Michael Kamen Inner circle Oakland, CA 1315 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-01-18 21:18, evolve629 wrote: Hi evolve629, I think David Blaine has a long way to go before our children's children can sit back and discuss what is remembered for, if anything, and why.
Michael Kamen
|
|||||||||
SpellbinderEntertainment Inner circle West Coast 3519 Posts |
Back on track...
Magic... (can be) (at its best) ...An Art! (if that's what your aim is anyway. And I wish it were moreso.) Whit! I must totally agree with you (and by extension Vernon) that “jokes” can drain the magic in an effect at times, and that many performers hide behind humor to “ease” the pain or guilt of powerful magic. That said, I feel if used carefully and with intention, humor (or even original jokes) can be used with great success to point-up the magic, if the humor is integral to the Magic, and the fun/joke grows organically out of the magical situation. I also must (sadly) agree that Story-Magic is much abused. The story must be to the point, clear, brief, pointed, and be meaningful. It must skillfully interlace with the magic happening, and the magic must lie comfortably upon the story. If the Magic is weak, or the Story is weak, or either or both are drawn out (and this happens a lot) the effort ends in total failure! I thought I’d giving myself a death-sentence frankly when I decided to do only “Theatrical Magic” and no one was more astounded than me, that my work tripled along with my fees, and that a whole world of corporate events was opened wide to me. But, that is partially due to a twenty-year background as a union actor and director, and a heck-of-a-hell-of-a-lot of effort to do this “story” thingies right! And it took time (about ten years) to integrate my persona, and the story/magic into a successful whole. This path is not for the meek or lazy, and as someone said… don’t try to be funny, unless you know how to be funny. And that means organic humor/story/magic to me. Thanks for your insights! Magically, Walt |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » Magic 'is' an Art! (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.13 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 < |