Hello everyone,

As a new magician, I can say that P&T definitely sparked my interest in getting involved with magic. I don't know much about their exposure (other than the cup and ball routine) but know that without them, I would not be pursuing magic with the intensity I am now. It appears to be a rough issue with strong feelings on both sides. *sigh* Us new magicians will just sit back and watch. I haven't decided where I sit yet.

~Ben

Well... to them and their audience, yes. They've said as much in shows. "... those cheesy magicians like David Copperfield"

Now, let's look at why that happened.

If you're competing for market share you need to find a way to separate yourself from the pack. When they were starting, David was the golden child of magic and ripe for parody with the carefully manufactured image and wind-in-the-hair iconic poses. They simply said what some of the country was feeling and found an ever increasing audience for their point of view. In other words if it didn't work, they wouldn't have kept doing it.

Would they mock the type of magic I was doing at the time? If I was more well known, of course they would have. They were going after the sacred cows of our time as a calculated gamble in PR. If it didn't work they would have shifted gears and mounted a different approach, but in fact it worked very well for them.

Comedians have frequently mocked magicians... especially when they are on top. In the 80's and 90's when magic was at its peak in Vegas there were merciless comedic attacks on magic and magicians because they were on top and the topic of the decade. Now that magic has faded more from the top spots it is on the decline. You might hear the occasional comedic routine on Criss Angel or David Blaine, but not too often.

This burlesquing of magicians (and yes, even some magic) has evolved into part of the fabric for Penn & Teller's show although their show is a lot more than that, of course.

Yes, they are "using magic" for commercial profit. I actually believe they care a lot about it as well and are passionate about what they do as performers. I don't want to defend any exposure, I just want to be realistic and gain perspective on motivation. I've never seen them expose anything for the sake of exposure. I have them seen them routine an effect where the audience is misdirected by an explanation and is eventually fooled as the result. Is it right to do this? Vernon did, many others have as well. You have to decide this for yourself as it is a personel opinion.

Ray-

Your cogent response to part of a post of mine compels me to thank you, notwithstanding that I had back-pedaled out of this debate.

Good to read well-stated and thoughtful opinions, and I can not disagree with what you say.

Regards,

Jim

Well, I never saw them live, but I've seen a few of their performances on the tube. I think I have a good idea about what they actually do: they entertain, and very well.

So is every other magician in the world when they do a magic show and get paid. P&T simply use the secrets for profit, which ironically magicians all over the world do too. But in that case its magicians selling secrets to other magicians.

What I love about Penn and Teller is they come across as, "Yes we're magicians but we don't take ourselves so seriously." That to me is what makes their show so unique. If you've ever heard Penn or Teller speak they have a lot more intellect and reasoning behind their magic than most of the people in magic today. I understand why their magic isn't for everyone, but I do think it is something that should be appreciated regardless of whether you like it or not.

I hate to break it to everyone but the public doesn't have the greatest view of magic and magicians. You could have the best slieght of hand and amazing effects but people could walk away feeling like you have insulted their intelligence. Obviously not all feel that way, but the name of the game is entertainment and a lot of people miss that aspect of it. Or, people think of magic as something for little kids and that they are above it.

Human beings involve magic in everyday life. Religion, movies, making wishes, daydreaming are all forms of magic that we interact with almost everyday. But, then why are adult audiences harder to get interested in magic? Obviously we as magicians are doing something wrong. I think P&T show adult audiences how they are secretly interested in magic and why it is fun to like magic. It's hard to find a magic act that addresses these aspects of life because magicians are way more interested in showing off what they can do.

Penn and Teller obviously keep entertainment as their first priority. They break the "fourth wall" and invite their audiences to take a different perspective of magic, which I think, lets their audience have more respect for magic. They are nothing like the masked magician, which is all about saying, "haha magician you can't fool me!" They are magicians who are doing a magic act, why would they want to destroy magic? It's funny to think of it like this, but what's the point of having a show if everyone likes it?

I'm with Beaulieu. I've had a fascination with magic ever since watching Doug Henning on TV as a little kid (kind of dating myself there). I've watched a lot of performers in various settings. But if I were to name one act that got me the most interested in actually learning and performing magic, it's would be Penn & Teller.

Why?

In a nutshell... because they're DIFFERENT. They don't take themselves (or anything else) seriously. They're this wild mixture of vaudeville, comedy, magic, social commentary, gross out humor, all rolled into one.

I've watched them on TV and seen their act in Vegas. Comparing them to the Masked Magician is completely ridiculous. Valentino's act IS exposing magic. The only tricks I've seen exposed by P&T are cups & balls, Blast Off & the 7 basic principles. And the last one is debatable because it's clearly a routine they developed specifically for the purposes of showing how it's done.

P&T exposed nothing in the show I saw, nor in the vast majority of TV appearances I've seen them do. The tricks they did were mind blowing and hilarious at the same time.

Now, before people get mad at me, please understand I am NOT saying exposing tricks is OK. Nor am I saying I personally would. I'm saying that as a spectator, as a fan of magic, I absolutely loved all three of the "exposure" routines I listed above. The way they did it made it just that much more entertaining not because they gave away a secret, but because of the way they did it. Cups & balls with clear plastic cups? I've watched that routine over and over and I'm still blown away by how smooth it is and how many I STILL miss. Blast Off is great just because you see Teller frantically scurrying around like he's in a habitrail. The 7 Principles is another one where you're still impressed because of how smoothly and effortlesly it's done.

P&T are that rare type that somehow knows how to find where a line is and walk right up to the very edge... occasionally stick a toe over... but not quite cross.

The Masked Magician seems to want to take the magic away from magic. P&T, even when showing you how a trick is done, somehow manage to make the experience even more magical.

The bad news is that more and more people seem to carve "being entertained" rather than finding ways to entertain themselves. This creates and insatiable maw that will be fed by someone -- if not by P&T, then by another. The problem isn't exposing magic, it is people allowing their cravings to run amuck.

The good news is that people watch these shows purely for entertainment. They will also watch the re-runs of P&T and the Masked MAgcian even though they know the outcome. It is a form of senility brought on by boredom rather than old age. Everyone knows how some moves of lInkiong Rings and Cups and Balls are done. They will still watch the re-runs.

The real problem IMHO is that fewer and fewer people will be inerested in doing the work required to become a good magician, when being a bad magician for the sake of entertainment pays better. (bad not having anything to do with skill. Fortunatley, there are those like Whit Haydn who can do good magic and be entertaining -- but he works at it.

I HATE those bad magicians that are entertaining. I like those good magicians that are not entertaining. That's what it is all about.

My goodness. This isn't a thread, it's a tapestry (though that makes it sound a bit more elegant than most of the comments here). All that I would like to add is that Joey Stalin, SWNerndase (and some others) get it right.

Penn and Teller are a couple of the performers who save magic for me, because what they do is smarter, more sophisticated and more experimental than what 90% or more of the other professionals come up with (including those who belong to every prestigious or seemingly prestigious magic club/group around). Their clear cups and balls and blast off acts are some of the only well-conceived, self-reflexive magic pieces that I've seen.

It's a good thing that we have avant-garde artists in magic like Penn and Teller. They force us to think harder about magic as a performing art and about all of its complexities.

Penn and Teller's worst bit is better than just about any other magician's material.

Who are these Penn & Teller guys? Never heard of them.

They're a couple of eccentric guys who learned to do a few cool things..

No reason you should. They're a couple of failed wannabes who can only find work in a major Vegas casino and occasionally on network television. If they were really good at doing magic they'd be out there on that all important lecture circuit or headlining at magic conventions instead of appearing on Letterman or their own Showtime series.

Wow, just read this entire thread from start to finish. Mainly for procrastination purposes.

Some people have said some interesting things on here, one or two magicians actually accusing P&T of causing their audience to question everything they do, and ruining the 'magic' of their show. It would seem other magicians either don't have this problem, or more importantly know how to handle or avoid those situations to begin with. Others claiming to have seen many shows and many TV shows of P&T's, giving them authority to discuss them, yet making many factual errors in their descriptions of P&T's performances, almost as though they were lying...

There are clearly two sides to this (duh) and I fall on the side that likes P&T. If it weren't for them, or for Sadowitz, or for other magicians who are also comedians magic would just be stale and boring. Their reveals may irk those who use similar effects in their shows, but I truly doubt it makes any difference what so ever to your audience. Believe it or not the same people who enjoy P&T can also enjoy a good cup and balls or mismade lady routine. If the audience isn't responding in the way you want, its not the fault of people exposing a similar trick, its your presentation. Either that or its a tough crowd, they do exist for every performer of every type.

Magic is an art of many forms, and not all forms will be to everyone's taste. They Don't expose your secrets, its just part of their stage persona. And you may not like this but their the reason most people in their mid 20's to late 30's are into magic today (I haven't taken any surveys, but certainly in the UK it was them and Paul Daniels on TV when I was a kid. I loved Paul Daniels, but P&T made magic far more interesting)

I really get the impression that those who think P&T are exposing secrets that should stay hidden need to see them perform, and if you have, watch it again with an open mind, and if you still think the same, your either one of the cheezy stuffy magicians their taking the **** out of, and don't have a sense of humour. Or you just don't get it, in which case, believe me, their not harming your trade, but you might be by taking your audience for fools.

You cant stop your audience trying to work out the method, and in some cases you will get the smug guy who thinks he knows everything, your performance should be able to handle this, they are at every performance and you will encounter them. They weren't planted there by P&T to destroy you, they are the hecklers at the comedy gig, they are the boo'ers at the music gig, they are the people who say "well I could have done that!" at the art gallery, they are the people who put down special effects in movies "that's obviously not real blood!", they are the people who will rain on everyone's parade, the party poopers, the haters. They are the people who just cant have a good time and think it makes them look smart to tell the performer, or host, or anyone who will listen how stupid they think they are and spoil things for everyone else.
Most people on the other hand are there to enjoy themselves and wont give you any trouble, learn to identify the trouble makers and avoid them, or do something so amazing they cant help but be impressed.

Also people are putting what P&T do in the same boat as copyright issues, this is completely unfair. P&T create acts which use a reveal as part of it, revealing nothing more than what the spectator already knew (the balls get swapped under the cups, of course they do, they don't actually appear by magic, but were not shown the method of the sleight. Teller was running about under the boxes and sticking limbs through, of course he was, he wasn't actually cut into 3 bits and then put back together again. Props made differently will not have the same effect and will still baffle), someone stealing a method, or a performance (using it and pretending its their own) is very wrong, and illegal. As is sharing peoples work without permission of the owner, or giving the secret of a method away (ie. exposing it) if it is original and clearly able to be attributed to an inventor AND specific to someone else's original trick.
These aren't hard and fast rules set in concrete, just my opinions. Also those who have brought up the magicians code; magic performance has moved on. Magicians are illusionists, and we all know it. I'm sorry but you seem to be clinging onto some sort of 1920's mystical notion that while may still be relevant to your performances, are not relevant to most of the magic audience. Most good performance is a battle of wits between the performer and the audience that the performer has to be good enough to win.

Rant over.

Jack-

Welcome to the Café, and thank you for a thought-provoking post!

Your points are well written, and show a good deal of thought. However, there will always be those who see the situation in somewhat different light.

I think the OP brings up a worthwhile question. I would really like to know why Penn & Teller, seriously good magicians and entertainers, who could play to packed houses until they retire, resort to exposure and degrading of fellow magicians when it is apparently not necessary.

Are there "hacks" in magic? Of course, they are everywhere. Does it help their "fellow" magicians to put this burr under the saddle-mind of a magicians spectator? Without a reason, no. So, what is that reason?

My uncle used to tell me, "anybody can be rich, just depends on what you are willing, or unwilling, to do".

Many would posit that P&T would be wildly popular even without the exposure. That being conceded, then why do they do it ???

Jim










Jim

Thank you for the welcome. And I must say what I've seen of this forum, so far it seems excellent.

Please bear in mind, I made that post after about 2 hours reading through the entire thread at some ridiculous time in the morning here in the UK, putting off some work I had to do for my seminar this afternoon, which as it turns out I was the only one who turned up to, so its a good job I eventually did the work

Yeah, I may have been more considered had I been in a normal state of mind. I do understand the arguments against. I do also stand by that some people are giving their opinions on something they only have here say evidence of, and that is most likely on both sides. I personally find P&T very entertaining and for me, their performances in no way demean other magicians. And their insults to other types of performers, while they may be genuinely felt by P&T, are only aspects of THEIR stage persona's.

I suppose it all comes down to whether you have a set in concrete principle of the secrets of magic, ie. die hard magicians coders.

I do disagree with what you say about anyone can be famous, it all depends on what your willing to do (with respect of P&T, in general the statement is certainly true). Look at Derren Brown, he tells his audience that there is no such thing whatsoever as psychic power, and that everything he does he does by subliminal suggestion. The premiss of his act is "look at how skilled I am! This is more amazing simply because there is no psychic power involved!". Then at the end of his shows he exposes his method, leaving out enough, and blatantly lying in some cases for the performance to be amazing for the audience, so much so that he sells out everywhere he performs.

I see a huge parallel between this and P&T. They tell their audience that there is no such thing as real magic and show enough of their method to make what they do seem that much more amazing to the audience, and they too sell out time and time again.

For me this doesn't damage the 'art of magic' but actually adds to it. I suspect that if the Magic Castle had taken this view years ago and not immediately thrown them out for their brilliant cups and balls routine, they would never have become so provocative towards other magicians in their performances.

So yeah, I can see that for many people who hold a certain magic ideology, what they do is completely against the grain of what the magic industry is all about.

For me this is not the case, they are fantastic to watch, and hilarious and add to the art of magic, not detract from it.

Jack

[EDIT]

I remember further back in the thread someone saying they recall Penn on a radio show revealing the method to any trick callers phoned in about. If this is accurate, I certainly cant defend that.

Jack-

You are the kind of person with whom I like to debate- articulate, reasoned, not sarcastic- thank you.

My quote was not about fame it was "anybody can be rich, just depends on what you are willing, or unwilling, to do". What I was trying to imply was that, if you substitute "entertaining" for "rich" you come to my quandary with P&T. They ARE entertaining, very much so, so why do they resort to any exposure at all since they don't need to?

I really do not mean to be on their case. I like them, respect them, have seen them be so kind with audience members. In thinking about this, I have concluded it is not P&T that I am responding to, rather those who insist they DO NOT expose. In my opinion they do, and I can't believe it is not blatantly obvious.

Regarding the deprecating remarks, I would be happy if they would just remove "cheesy magicians" from their lexicon. But then, they don't give a rip if I am happy or not so I won't wait for that boon.

I really need to find out more about Derren Brown- I have seen a couple of things, and he looks like he really has a great style. As my hands get stiffer, I think of mentalism as a future destination...

Good to converse with you, Jack...

Jim

Its great to debate with people such as yourself too Jim, articulate, reasoned, not sarcastic are all words which describe your debating style as well, and I appreciate that.

It seems clear that people with different tastes and/or principles will never agree on this. Their style is not purely magic, their blast off routine for example, magic at first, then pure slapstick. Teller could be the Buster Keaton of the comedy circuit

So different strokes for different folks I guess.

I wonder how many people would be into magic these days if it wasn't for people such as P&T, or even the masked magician (who I'm not particularly keen on) or people giving away the odd secret. I think it shows people that magic is accessible, you can do it too sort of idea.
Not good for people who want to feel their part of an exclusive club, great for people like me who would almost certainly never have got an interest in the art otherwise. I suppose it all comes down to balance, and people will always draw the line in different places. No bad thing.

Jack.

No bad thing at all, Jack.

The Buster Keaton comment is spot on- I had not thought of it before, but Teller even has that Keaton smirk!

Jim

What's most interesting to me about this thread is not the issue at hand, but those pearls dropped by the giants (in my book) like Whit and Todd.

This sentence will give me a whole evening of thinking material.